LCA News and Discussions

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.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3272
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Tanaji » 13 Aug 2010 14:31

Tsarkar:

One could argue that the IAF required a "modern" fighter in all respects. At that time it was enamored with the Mirage2000 design philosophy. The ADA went along with this. As regards composites, the ADA always knew that the engine was the weak link, and weight reductions were to be done wherever possible. The composites was a hedge against that. IT turns out that they were right in the long run.

As far as higher thrust engines, one could argue that the IAF took a long time with the R-73 requirement which further added weight. The other part was over engineering: most of the components in the aircraft are over engineered. The ADA very well knew that a crash will be disastrous, given the IAF's initial lack of enthusiasm and the general love of the Armed forces for foreign stuff. And given that it was the first attempt, they have over engineered the aircraft to a good degree to be on the safe side. Can you imagine if the LCA had a history during testing as that of the Lawn Dart? The actuator stuff has been dealt with above.

The optimizations will come later, once they are convinced that the basic design is sound.

BTW, when the LCA was first rolled out, there were very snide remarks from worthies in the Armed forces such as Admiral Nadkarni about the foreign content in the programme. You are suggesting we should have had more of them. No doubt, cause for more snide remarks.

The ADA was caught between a rock and a hard place and it couldnt win. Too much indigenous development leads to delays and criticism like yours, too much imports results in a costly fighter, sanction prone and subject to criticism from the likes of Admiral Nadkarni. They just couldnt win!

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3633
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Neela » 13 Aug 2010 15:32

tsarkar wrote:Validations are a part of every step of the design process. Its not that you validate once everything is finished. Assessment during the design phase should have made the weight issue come out, it happened with the JSF as well and was handled in the development itself.



Do not agree Sir. Please remember, not only are we designing a new aircraft , we are learning HOW to design as well. Let me quote you an analogy.

I had an interesting talk with my manager while working for a semiconductor company. The devices made are in the range of 45nm. I often used to wonder how the principal scientists in the company shrink to the next generation of transistors going to 32nm. I asked my manager what parameters they take into consideration. After all, a shrink in dimensions means you just have to tweak your tools or buy new equipment. Sounds simple!
Her quote was interesting.The principal scientists have about 20 years experience in this field. They have seen generation upon generation of products rolled out. Given that kind of knowledge, they know where heat issues would come up, where manufacturing issues would come up, where driving subsequent stages in a circuit would be difficult, where the die size would increase and where it would decrease. It does NOT pop up like that. It comes ONLY with experience.
With the ADA , they did not have this kind of people who could see the issues that could come up later.

Example: The ADA were not sure how much stress the landing gear should handle for the LCA-N. If I were to take your words, then ADA's simulations should be enough! Design, simulate and go to the workshop. Job done !
Having a little experience in the semicondutor manufacturing sector,even I can tell you that that is B$. Fact is you dont know if it is enough! You dont know if you have seen all the problems it would face. Heck , we have had product re-spins that cost upward of $3million despite being in the industry for 15 years!
Now imagine what the ADA faced 10 years ago where everything was unclear.

Like I said, in retrospect everything could have been done better!

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 13 Aug 2010 15:38

Tanaji,

It is the age of global sourcing. Parts coming from Taiwan or Botswana or doesnt matter as long as the part is reliable, cheap and we have a constant supply. The GoI fetish for indigenization reflected in CAG report is nonsense and unproductive in the long run. Starting from scratch is symmetric, we need to be asymmetric.

What the nation needs is our scientists/engineers these multifarious technologies available globally and locally and put together in an effective system. This is the value add our scientists/engineers should be doing. This is what I perceive the Chinese to be doing. This realization has dawned, and new projects reflect this trend.

Neela - that is why technology audits and risk assessments done. Charting the course after starting leads to these kinds of issues in the long run. Project Management is sorely missing in defence R&D, atleast it was in the 90's, I'm not sure how things stand today.
Last edited by tsarkar on 13 Aug 2010 16:16, edited 1 time in total.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nrshah » 13 Aug 2010 16:08

Tsarkar,

I agree with you with respect to use of ready part available instead of starting everything from sketch.... However, the opportunities that are available to us with respect to global outsourcing that you are referring to, were not available when the project started in late 80's and early 90s... Soviet union collapse was a recent event and we were still looked upon a very strong SU ally...

And when you consider it retrospectively, it looks like we were not wrong also not trusting the americans for the parts... Take for eg the termination of consultancy on FBW, Holding supply for engines etc...

The Tejas is delayed not because ADA went to reinvent the things... but for the following reasons as well:

1 - FBW codes confiscated by Americans - delay of around 2 years
2 - Engine supply delayed - Delay of around 2 years
3 - Constant change in GSQR- time and again debated and very well put in the LCA thread itself
4 - Poor support of the user...

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 13 Aug 2010 16:15

Marten wrote:To add to Kartik's wonderfully illuminating post, here are two threads of relevance to this discussion.
TinWing at Keypubs wrote here
TinWing at Keypubs wrote: Quote: Originally Posted by aerospacetech 1980

ECA; P106B (P106A was conventional tailed version, no illustration)
The P106B was both the starting point of Saab's Grippen and India's LCA.
Compare this cropped photo of a windtunnel model from Aero India 2005 with P106B. It's from the HF-73 thread.


The link he referred to is to the HF-73 thread where posts 33 and 36 are very illuminating. Snippets here for your pleasure:



A related photograph of India's aborted programs
Image

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby manum » 13 Aug 2010 18:03

hi marten

see, we don't know about common mass, that they should appreciate or not...because LCA is a defence project worth huge as compared to amount of uneducated and below poverty line people...such programs are great contrast... I don't expect common mass to understand it..and if such reports trickle down to common mass of constant failure...and in terms of capital...they become critical...all i am telling leave common mass out of it...they are struggling with their own realities...

such programs are bridge to leap many constraints of ours...in form of Industry...Like I am an architect(many in common mass don't know what we do, they think we are civil engineers)...and now we use CAD-CAM software like pencil...because of programs like LCA...and 3D printing....has replaced our hand modelling...

now we also analyse our projects in 3D's...with respect to India...this all we owe to LCA or projects like LCA...and now in automobile industry...90% of automobile related parts are reverse engineered...as china jets, and I've seen how they reverse engineer even engine inside, by cutting em in many sections, and pasting dots inside and out...and then all we see is point cloud in CAM software...if we go in any delhi market...but common mass doesn't know it, I don't know if they are there to blame or not...at least I won't ...

LCA and alike projects have done enough for Indian economy...and world economy...but now they'll have to do it for themselves too...all I am trying to say, we are very poor...hopefully no links are required to prove it...

but we are daring to break this jinx of being poor...but don't expect no one will criticize...because few elites think they are doing the right thing, they must be...but they must succeed to their own clients...to prove it...there is no other way...if they have dared to the take up task to uplift a nation of billion...

PS. sorry for OT, if mods feel it is...

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Singha » 13 Aug 2010 18:11

diff between true aerospace powers and the rest is that money and people are made
available to try ten different projects of which 9 fail and are used as learning
tools and data banks.

the 10th become the f-solahs and f-panra's of the world.

us/russia have tried 100s of prototype activities to be where they are today.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 13 Aug 2010 18:42

f18 is a derivative of the yf17 which lost out to the yf16 for the usaf contest...

sumshyam
BRFite
Posts: 552
Joined: 23 Sep 2009 19:30
Location: Ganga ki dharti.
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby sumshyam » 13 Aug 2010 18:48

Lalmohan wrote:f18 is a derivative of the yf17 which lost out to the yf16 for the usaf contest...



Well my friend, this is a pretty old story..and it doesn't tell that the same is inferior to YF16 or its derivative.

To say, the competition was in place to find an alternative for F15 with 90% of its capability and 50% of the cost. Without a doubt F-18 is a capable platform..!

Though in Indian Scenario, It may not be best suited.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 13 Aug 2010 19:07

i was refering to singha's comment on multiple vendors competing, not on the capability of the aircraft (my friend)

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby RKumar » 13 Aug 2010 19:28

LCA-Tejas has completed 1410 Test Flights successfully. (13-Aug-10).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-160, PV3-223,LSP1-59,LSP2-154,PV5-16, LSP3-14,LSP4-4)

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby manum » 13 Aug 2010 20:41

yup this is 2010, try passing through any local station in Mumbai...and looking just bit further the road sides...trying seeing what caps our drains everywhere...
try going to any government hospitals...and see what changed from 1970's...
1/3rd of world poor live in India...we cant even afford low cost affordable concepts of world standards...that is also costly for us...we cant afford standard quality of bricks to build our houses...you know why...because we don't have electricity 2/3rd of day...in most of Indian towns...

and above I didn't criticised LCA...I just said be sincere...even to the criticism...its not unnecessary...

all I said above...we owe alot to LCA and projects alike...but every penny saved due to sincere efforts can be used...this money is hard earned money...this is not an era of 1:9 success ratio...nor this is era where USA and Europe were sitting of stock pile of money...stolen from India, China and Africa...

P.S. my last reply...on this topic..

yantra
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 03:46

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby yantra » 13 Aug 2010 21:40

manum wrote:hi marten

see, we don't know about common mass, that they should appreciate or not...because LCA is a defence project worth huge as compared to amount of uneducated and below poverty line people...such programs are great contrast... I don't expect common mass to understand it..and if such reports trickle down to common mass of constant failure...and in terms of capital...they become critical...all i am telling leave common mass out of it...they are struggling with their own realities...

.....

PS. sorry for OT, if mods feel it is...


What is the whole point of this rant? Drop all R&D, developments and quests? Allow Pakis, Sri-Lankans and Chinese to come and invade us and provide for our poor? Typical koopa-manduka argument!! baah!

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4913
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Kartik » 13 Aug 2010 21:45

Tanaji wrote:Tsarkar:

One could argue that the IAF required a "modern" fighter in all respects. At that time it was enamored with the Mirage2000 design philosophy. The ADA went along with this. As regards composites, the ADA always knew that the engine was the weak link, and weight reductions were to be done wherever possible. The composites was a hedge against that. IT turns out that they were right in the long run.

As far as higher thrust engines, one could argue that the IAF took a long time with the R-73 requirement which further added weight. The other part was over engineering: most of the components in the aircraft are over engineered. The ADA very well knew that a crash will be disastrous, given the IAF's initial lack of enthusiasm and the general love of the Armed forces for foreign stuff. And given that it was the first attempt, they have over engineered the aircraft to a good degree to be on the safe side. Can you imagine if the LCA had a history during testing as that of the Lawn Dart? The actuator stuff has been dealt with above.

The optimizations will come later, once they are convinced that the basic design is sound.

BTW, when the LCA was first rolled out, there were very snide remarks from worthies in the Armed forces such as Admiral Nadkarni about the foreign content in the programme. You are suggesting we should have had more of them. No doubt, cause for more snide remarks.

The ADA was caught between a rock and a hard place and it couldnt win. Too much indigenous development leads to delays and criticism like yours, too much imports results in a costly fighter, sanction prone and subject to criticism from the likes of Admiral Nadkarni. They just couldnt win!


Couldn't agree more with you Tanaji. These are points that we've discussed to death on LCA threads of the past and they keep re-occuring.

I was pointing out that the Tejas' parts were over-designed with a view to safety a couple of years ago itself when there was a lot of discussion about the Tejas being overweight (can check archived threads). From a stress engineer's point of view especially, conservatism is natural, since every part cannot be tested till it fails, so just to be on the safe side, margins are built into the analysis by using assumptions that may be considered too conservative by highly experienced stress analysts. Sometimes as design engineers are inexperienced they may come up with a design of a part that could've been done better. As more and more experience is built up, they can optimize the structure. Based on accelerated use data from a static and fatigue test Tejas example that sits on the ground throughout, much can be gleaned about how the composite and alloy structures withstand long term use and from the flying examples that carry strain gauges and temperature tabs or meters, one can get a good idea about whether or not the initial assumptions on loads and temperatures were accurate or not. Parts can be optimized with that data. It'll be an on-going activity and on the Tejas Mk2 they may well be able to optimize further.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4913
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Kartik » 13 Aug 2010 22:04

Neela wrote:Do not agree Sir. Please remember, not only are we designing a new aircraft , we are learning HOW to design as well. Let me quote you an analogy.

I had an interesting talk with my manager while working for a semiconductor company. The devices made are in the range of 45nm. I often used to wonder how the principal scientists in the company shrink to the next generation of transistors going to 32nm. I asked my manager what parameters they take into consideration. After all, a shrink in dimensions means you just have to tweak your tools or buy new equipment. Sounds simple!
Her quote was interesting.The principal scientists have about 20 years experience in this field. They have seen generation upon generation of products rolled out. Given that kind of knowledge, they know where heat issues would come up, where manufacturing issues would come up, where driving subsequent stages in a circuit would be difficult, where the die size would increase and where it would decrease. It does NOT pop up like that. It comes ONLY with experience.
With the ADA , they did not have this kind of people who could see the issues that could come up later.

Example: The ADA were not sure how much stress the landing gear should handle for the LCA-N. If I were to take your words, then ADA's simulations should be enough! Design, simulate and go to the workshop. Job done !
Having a little experience in the semicondutor manufacturing sector,even I can tell you that that is B$. Fact is you dont know if it is enough! You dont know if you have seen all the problems it would face. Heck , we have had product re-spins that cost upward of $3million despite being in the industry for 15 years!
Now imagine what the ADA faced 10 years ago where everything was unclear.

Like I said, in retrospect everything could have been done better!


I agree with what you're saying here Neela.

The same applies to aerospace as well. It was mentioned in a Standing Committee on Defence Parliamentary report that a Chief Designer requires nearly 20 years of experience in the field, just so he can lead a team of younger and less experienced engineers. Without constant funding or projects in aerospace, this type of experience can neither be built nor sustained. People will leave for greener pastures and without their knowledge and insight, what you'll get is a product with defects that an experienced person would've been able to point out just by looking.

Just as you quote an example, I have an example to quote just to emphasize how much India needs Tejas and AMCA like programs to continue for a vibrant aerospace industry to be built up. We were dealing with a weight optimisation issue where the question was about whether or not certain doubler plies could be removed from a composite part. Our analysis showed that it was possible and yet all legacy parts and drawings had these doubler plies almost as a standard. After spending a couple of weeks trying to convince the lead and the AR about removing those doubler plies, they were still not convinced. We were asked to talk to 2 leads who had between them close to 45 years of experience in aerospace structures and composites and it was a revelation ! The questions they asked, the approach they took to look at whether or not those doublers were required (for instance whether the part was in a FOD or hail critical zone) was different from what I or my lead or AR took which was more related to the analysis and the manufacturing aspect. Once these questions were addressed it was a breeze convincing the rest about the feasibility of optimisation. The reason was simply because they knew the service issues that those parts would face and the doublers were meant to help in solving those. It wasn't mentioned anywhere in stress notes or any design manual, but it resided in the head of a guy who had worked on similar parts in the past.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 13 Aug 2010 23:40

Kartik, you’re giving a chicken and egg logic. To summarize your, Tanaji's and Neela’s posts in a nutshell -

Complex projects need extensive experience. So keep gaining extensive experience by undertaking complex projects.

I ask a basic question to ADA and you. The IAF needed certain capabilities. What was the LEAST COMPLEX answer to fulfilling those capabilities?

The German aviation industry was killed by the Treaty of Versailles and Willy Messerschmitt brought it to par of other powers by building the Bf-109 using legacy technologies & components but innovative ideas – building the smallest possible fighter around the largest available engine.

Isnt when such questions are asked that effective project management starts?

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby negi » 14 Aug 2010 02:08

Sir but Hitler himself was overseeing the German buildup as far as aviation is concerned that is why Reich Aviation Ministry came into being. Such was the support from Hitler and the military that they had likes of Messersschmitt, Arado, Focke-Wulf and Heinkels competing by later half of 1930s.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2274
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby VinodTK » 14 Aug 2010 04:09

RKumar wrote:LCA-Tejas has completed 1410 Test Flights successfully. (13-Aug-10).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-160, PV3-223,LSP1-59,LSP2-154,PV5-16, LSP3-14,LSP4-4)


Has LCA clocked 1000 hours of flying (All flights combined)? Is there a possibility of crossing 1600 hours by December of 2010?

Vikram W
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 74
Joined: 12 May 2010 02:23

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Vikram W » 14 Aug 2010 04:38

RKumar wrote:LCA-Tejas has completed 1410 Test Flights successfully. (13-Aug-10).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-160, PV3-223,LSP1-59,LSP2-154,PV5-16, LSP3-14,LSP4-4)


refer http://www.ada.gov.in/archives.htm

Just 10 flights in a month and a half with 10 aircrafts ? are these guys serious about getting IOC ??

naird
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 04 Jun 2009 19:41

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby naird » 14 Aug 2010 05:45

VinodTK wrote:
RKumar wrote:LCA-Tejas has completed 1410 Test Flights successfully. (13-Aug-10).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-160, PV3-223,LSP1-59,LSP2-154,PV5-16, LSP3-14,LSP4-4)


Has LCA clocked 1000 hours of flying (All flights combined)? Is there a possibility of crossing 1600 hours by December of 2010?


I really have my doubts -- on whether this can be achieved...

If an average of 30 min flight is taken into account -- we still have approx 600 test flights to go !!
So if 1000 hours is the bench mark then in all probability we can hear an announcement from ADA soon about extending the deadline further :cry: ......

However i believe no of hours might not be the bench mark -- the bench mark may be the no of valid test points....in that case IOC maybe achieved in less than 1000 hours.

Either ways...i think the dec 2010 deadline is at risk !

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby krishnan » 14 Aug 2010 06:11

Even if we take 30 mins as per you, it has clocked 705 hours

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 14 Aug 2010 08:59

Vikram W wrote:
RKumar wrote:LCA-Tejas has completed 1410 Test Flights successfully. (13-Aug-10).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-160, PV3-223,LSP1-59,LSP2-154,PV5-16, LSP3-14,LSP4-4)


refer http://www.ada.gov.in/archives.htm

Just 10 flights in a month and a half with 10 aircrafts ? are these guys serious about getting IOC ??


Have you checked the weather in Bangalore? One of the biggest jokes about my American relatives is that they call July and August as "summer". They don't even know that its the monsoon. Talk about cluelessness.

ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby ShivaS » 14 Aug 2010 09:36

Why cant we induct Tejas even if it is slightly under powered or over weight, till such time find remedies for that.
We need numbers for our fleet to be viable. Can not M2000 and tejas form some kind of wolf pack (for tactics in the interim).

IAF will also benefit from gaining expereince in our home grown stuff, instead of few test pilots or select few of IAF.

JMHT

( we have used under powered a/c Su 7, HF-24, yes even Hunter for various roles creatively)

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1857
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby uddu » 14 Aug 2010 10:26

1350 flights and 800 hours
So around 840 hours by now.
Don't know whether this image has been posted before. The week magazine carries the picture of LCA weapon test.
Image

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1857
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby uddu » 14 Aug 2010 11:03


SanjibGhosh
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 30 Jan 2009 18:49

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SanjibGhosh » 15 Aug 2010 09:23


Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2074
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Picklu » 15 Aug 2010 13:10

tsarkar wrote:Kartik, you’re giving a chicken and egg logic. To summarize your, Tanaji's and Neela’s posts in a nutshell -

Complex projects need extensive experience. So keep gaining extensive experience by undertaking complex projects.

I ask a basic question to ADA and you. The IAF needed certain capabilities. What was the LEAST COMPLEX answer to fulfilling those capabilities?

The German aviation industry was killed by the Treaty of Versailles and Willy Messerschmitt brought it to par of other powers by building the Bf-109 using legacy technologies & components but innovative ideas – building the smallest possible fighter around the largest available engine.

Isnt when such questions are asked that effective project management starts?


When there are no projects, where from the project management experience will come? For consistent output, you need project management experience. It is not just some god given talent, it needs the experience to refine. This refinement shows when Boeing or the other established players start a new project .. they can take multiple short cuts at the initial stage to arrive to the 90% final stage at a lot quicker pace and spend more time there to fine tune the final product to have the discovery channel type fit and finish.
Let me ask you a question, how will Indian military fare if tasked with an invasion of, say Peru outside UN umbrella? As good as Normandy landing? With all the nuances of radical technical ideas and double agents misleading the defensive forces?
However i have full confidence that their repeat performance will be much better.
Same with DRDO. Once Prithvi is leaked, the other ballistic missiles come out easy. Once dhruv is done, LCH is fairly well paced. Let LCA finish, and AMCA will be ........
IA was not sent to dogs because of 1962, DRDO should be given the same consideration at least once for each product/technology category

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 15 Aug 2010 15:05

[quote="Picklu"]When there are no projects, where from the project management experience will come?[/quote]
National experience in HF-24 Marut or the canned HF-73

[quote="Picklu"]how will Indian military fare if tasked with an invasion of, say Peru [b]outside UN umbrella[/b]?[/quote]
They will provide an honest & practical assessment like Sam Bahadur gave to Indira Gandhi :) I believe no practical assessment of complexity and mapping of that complexity with resources/capabilities in hand was done in case of Tejas.

Without meaning any disrespect to the effort, its the unnecessary complexity and passing off that complexity as necessary is what I am averse to.

tathagata.ghosh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 21:38

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tathagata.ghosh » 15 Aug 2010 15:07

Any news regarding the LSP 5 launch? They were supposed to gear it up this month with full avionics in place and also night vision radars etc.

With regards to DRDO's project management I have three points:

a) Yes it is complex to design a fighter of this capability ground up and DRDO learnt a lot in the process.

b) It is also true being a PSU there is chalta hai attitude, which eventually delays decision making. DRDO must be reformed as their lackadaisical attitude towards projects and intermittent delays are costing the nation billions of dollars.

c) Our scientists are more than capable but the red tapes thrwats our progress.

Jai Hind and Happy Independence Day

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby RKumar » 15 Aug 2010 16:48

OT on I-Day ....

To all those who are in favour of imported maal and DRDO bashing .... open a history book ... you will see

1) how long it took to have a mature cycle design... which is not very complex as per todays standard. But in the very start it tooook loooooong enough.
2) how long it took to have a mature car design... which somewhat complex even today. Even Tata a private and one of the best firm in India and still took loong enough to design and build a car.

Another perspective...
1) dont perform R&D and no failure done -> live in stone age
2) Do R&D, be slow and have 1000000s failure -> have pride and modern age
3) buy imported maal and learn how to use screw driver called ToT -> modern age (if you can afford) but without pride

so everyone have different parameters ... some prefer option 1, other 2, and many 3 because no back breaking work is required and someone else is doing their dirty and labor work.

Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction. Jai Hind!!

Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3272
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Tanaji » 15 Aug 2010 17:30

Without meaning any disrespect to the effort, its the unnecessary complexity and passing off that complexity as necessary is what I am averse to.


Agree completely, and this is the logical and the one with least risk forward. The question arises when the end user demands a product that is at par with what established foreign vendors are selling, and in some cases, looks at the design agency as a vendor purely, rather than a user that can provide input to development and "co-ownership".

Lets ignore the Arjun for the moment since you do not like that example. With LCA, the initial IAF requirement as a "MIG 21 replacement for point defence" (which equated to 80s era tech) has morphed into something that the ADA had to leapfrog generations of technology with at least late 90s tech with some cutting edge tech thrown in. Do you think IAF would have accepted a Mig 21 bison/Bandar type of aircraft even in the last decade had it been delivered then? IAF wants the best, and best equates to complexity.

You are from a naval background. I need not tell you how the Navy went about designing its ships, from the initial tweaks and modifications to Leander class, accepting that product (even when it wasn't the "best" at the time), building on that in subsequent generations to get the Delhi and P-17A class that we are at today. Complexity and risk was mitigated, confidence built and timescales adhered to (for most part).

Not saying DRDO/ADA are paragons of virtue, far from it, but just trying to show how it takes two to tango.

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Drishyaman » 15 Aug 2010 19:07

LCA has come a long way, may be it took 20 - 25 yrs from the drawing broad. But consider the fact that it has (or rather going to have) 4 variants as of now.
1. IAF Tejas,
2. IAF Tejas Trainer,
3. IN Tejas,
4. IN Tejas Trainer
Now, consider the fact in another 3-4 yrs (I may be over optimistic) Tejas is going to have indigenious AESA radar and Kaveri-Snecma Engine.
I feel the future of Tejas is actually bright.

GURUS can you comment on my observation

tathagata.ghosh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 21:38

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tathagata.ghosh » 16 Aug 2010 01:01

I am not into DRDO bashing as per say but I would definitely go by CAG report about their shortcomings. We can chest-thump ourselves into believing that the PSU - DRDO is doing whatever it can as fast it can. I have no doubt about our world-class scientists but what I was talking about is the red tape and the need to reform the DRDO not to buy any more foreign maal. Reform it streamline it and put accountability as a prime mover, you will see the difference. ISRO is such a success whereas DRDO has had some successes in patches but its failures have been glaring too.

As per Tejas is concerned, it indeed has a bright future and in this regrad I would fault the IAF more than DRDO as they keep on changing their requirements and demanding more from the fighter. This was to be a replacement of mig-21 but the more I read about it the more it seems IAF wants a mountain out of a mole (what do they want - a 5th gen fighter in Tejas?). This plane should be inducted in huge numbers 500 at least and then talk about future development.

prastor
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 11:43

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby prastor » 16 Aug 2010 03:36

So much DRDO bashing going on about how they handled the Tejas project. Consider these points:

1. LCA design was finalized in 1990. With a devastating financial crunch in 1991 and heavy sanctions in place since 1998. LCA is reaching IOC at the end of this year. Which means, 20 years of development for a country that is doing it for the first time.
2. The YF-22/23 program was selected in 1986. The program, in a country with no financial recession in this period and with decades of fighter development experience, took 20 years to mature into the final product F-22 Raptor and even today still struggles to meet all the requirements of the USAF.

So, compared to who or what are people complaining about HAL/DRDO?

tathagata.ghosh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 21:38

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tathagata.ghosh » 16 Aug 2010 05:39

All the above is true "prastor" but what the americans and the russians and the chinese and even the israelis have is a military-industrial-complex, which DRDO and other PSUs have resisted over the years. If we want to indigenise the defence industry we need to build a competent MIC and involve big firms fulltime. 10 yrs back Chinese aviation industry was way behind us, now China is building their own version of the Airbus (10 yrs is what made the difference). We cannot rely only on DRDO or HAL or for that matter on any PSU ... civil industry has to be involved.

prastor
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 11:43

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby prastor » 16 Aug 2010 06:00

tathagata.ghosh wrote:All the above is true "prastor" but what the americans and the russians and the chinese and even the israelis have is a military-industrial-complex, which DRDO and other PSUs have resisted over the years. If we want to indigenise the defence industry we need to build a competent MIC and involve big firms fulltime. 10 yrs back Chinese aviation industry was way behind us, now China is building their own version of the Airbus (10 yrs is what made the difference). We cannot rely only on DRDO or HAL or for that matter on any PSU ... civil industry has to be involved.


This is a bit OT...

But, I don't think we should look at a Military Industrial Complex as a good thing. At least not in the American Capitalist model. America is facing huge budget issues due to the same complex. Russia is begging and snatching money from India to keep it's complex from crumbling and the Chinese are good at mimicking whatever Americans do. They might even learn how to fart the American way.

India can create a Military Industrial Complex in total control of the government. It is slow, but steady. Involving private contractors into defense industry will give you results initially, but they will grow into huge monsters with unbeatable lobbies securing their survival through sucking tax money for stupid projects that the nation does not need. America is our best example. Just have a look at how much they spend on defense each year. It is not cheap to maintain a Military Industrial Complex. India just can't afford it with 1.2 Billion mouths to feed and so much more to develop in.

Whatever we have achieved till date, is a lot more than any other country could have done with the same resources and restrictions. Again, I'd like to repeat that before you point out a role model for defense development, check their annual defense budgets and compare it to ours.

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby manum » 16 Aug 2010 08:56

but everything, everyone we are aiming have, had larger budget any day of history(what I am trying to say, are we developing arms for self defence only and only...we'll never have policy of making profit from it, (so never a war will fought on our weapons largely on foreign lands)...only as a foreign policy, what do you see in future...where are we heading...do you think these private firms after investment and research won't demand greater autonomy...which will ultimately lead to obvious...more or less here and there...

What do you think, we have a great catch, we are cost effective, good and competitive technology wise...take Tejas as an example...all we need is good packaging...and supporting foreign policy.

how we'll become sufficiently self dependent, if we don't get into military complex like structure (like Tejas engine, future digestion of its imported technology and of others we aiming at)...how much a controlled government structure can take? or it's better and thought out policy of importing key technologies...so that we have a controlled monster...or we want everything of our own...then we need a monster or a jinn (ji huzoor), do we?

what kind of world power we are aiming to become? or even road of self defence leads you there...

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2198
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 16 Aug 2010 09:24

Folks please stop harping on LCA was started..... etc. The LCA is now ready. They have also evolved the naval fighter, a leap in the design from the shore based version. The aircraft has undergone weaponisation, hot and cold weather trials, the flight control laws are mature. What we need to clone 200 of these fighters on a war footing and station them on the frontlines. The enemy should know that a single hostile aircraft entering Indian airspace will be "warmly greeted".

prastor
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 11:43

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby prastor » 16 Aug 2010 10:53

manum wrote:but everything, everyone we are aiming have, had larger budget any day of history(what I am trying to say, are we developing arms for self defence only and only...we'll never have policy of making profit from it, (so never a war will fought on our weapons largely on foreign lands)...only as a foreign policy, what do you see in future...where are we heading...do you think these private firms after investment and research won't demand greater autonomy...which will ultimately lead to obvious...more or less here and there...

What do you think, we have a great catch, we are cost effective, good and competitive technology wise...take Tejas as an example...all we need is good packaging...and supporting foreign policy.

how we'll become sufficiently self dependent, if we don't get into military complex like structure (like Tejas engine, future digestion of its imported technology and of others we aiming at)...how much a controlled government structure can take? or it's better and thought out policy of importing key technologies...so that we have a controlled monster...or we want everything of our own...then we need a monster or a jinn (ji huzoor), do we?

what kind of world power we are aiming to become? or even road of self defence leads you there...


Self sufficiency does not come overnight manum. Patience is a virtue. You can't rush R&D and expect desired results. Like I pointed out before, even the world's largest, richest and most advanced Military Industrial Complex (MIC), in USA, had taken 20 years to build a fighter while India, with no MIC and pathetic funding (comparatively), got their first ever fighter out at 4.5 Gen in the same period. I don't even have to discuss the JSF program and its weight, cost and performance issues while 4 years behind schedule.

About critical technologies, for example in Tejas, it is simply because we just started. It is a matter of time before we gain expertise in one field after another and end up self reliant in a decade or two. Stop comparing Indian defense PSUs to American, Russian or Chinese MICs. It is an insult to our efficiency & improvisation; something the MICs lack.

archan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6821
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 21:30
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby archan » 16 Aug 2010 15:21

manum, prastor, please do not derail the LCA thread with generic points. Please take it elsewhere. Thanks.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests