Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

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.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby NRao » 16 Apr 2013 18:32

I would like to see tie-ups, between Indian and good foreign, entities that deal with basic research. Not aiming for any end product (like the FGFA, etc - those efforts need another thread). Until India has a basic, mature, truthful, etc research effort we should be seeing the Indian armed forces either running abroad for foreign products or playing the waiting game for in-house products. Do not see any way around this.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Austin » 16 Apr 2013 18:35

rohitvats wrote:At the expense of repeating myself - Can anyone explain that if (as the HAL claims) only the engine and ejection seat are imported and valued at INR 6 Crore, what else constitutes INR 29 Crore in the projected per unit cost of INR 35 Crore?


Rohit , unless one has the break up of each component you cant exactly quote how much each component and sub-component cost but beyond Engine and Ejection seat , there is Cockpit instrumentation , OBOGS ,Avionics & Control system, Navigation Equipment ,Materials & Aircraft Frame , Canopy ,backup instrument/power supply ...Assemby/Tool/Jigs/Men & Production cost YOY , Profit generated per unit cost.

Here is a Specs of HTT-40
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zPZjuE58Bk8/U ... +BTT-2.jpg

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 16 Apr 2013 18:35

rohitvats wrote:Arre bhai....the phoren plan cost INR 38 Crore and Indian one INR 35 Crore? What gives?


I can only give you an answer based upon my knowledge, if you are looking for the exact breakup then either you need to get your hands on the report given by HAL to MoD or shoot off an RTI to them and wait for a reply.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Austin » 16 Apr 2013 18:39

Here is some info from a young engineer

‘Our trainer aircraft 40 times better than F-16s’

While the Indian Air Force has decided to import PC-7 aircraft made by Swiss firm Pilatus Aircraft, Bhadoria isn’t too pleased. The HTT-40 is a far superior aircraft and according to him, it can deliver 40 hours of flying for the same cost an F-16 or MiG- 29 will deliver in just one hour – which kind of explains why the plane gets the number in its name.

“When we are talking about developing fifth generation aircraft in this country, it is sad we have to import a trainer aircraft from a foreign country. After over 60 years of Independence, do we have to show our power by importing a trainer craft,” he asked.

The HTT-40, he said, also has an unusual quality for a training aircraft. It can strap up guns and bombs and get into combat mode when there is a need for one. “It can fly up to 600 kmph and reach an altitude of 6 km,” he added.

The young engineer is visibly charged. “We can test the craft by 2015 and go into production mode two years from there.”

The PC-7 costs approximately Rs 37 crore (order for 75 aircraft at $520 million) each while the HTT-40 is estimated to cost Rs 33 crore. The IAF took delivery of 2 PC-7s earlier this week.

He did his Masters in Science from Cranfield University in the UK and topped his class.

It must be a no-brainer to assume a bright engineer like Bhadoria would cherry-pick his job in the US or Europe with some of the best aircraft makers who would pay a king’s ransom as salary. “Absolutely not. I come from a place like Nanded and HAL gave me an identity by sending me to the UK for my Masters. I will continue to work for this organisation for the rest of my life,” he said.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Austin » 16 Apr 2013 18:41

So the best case scneario is they can fly the first prototype by 2015 and go into production in two years i.e 2017 , would say pretty optimistic , they best we can expect HTT-40 hitting production line is 2018-2020

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2403
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby John » 16 Apr 2013 19:17

First focus on getting Sitara out before jumping into next project.

Delay in Scorpene 5 years, Gorky 5 years, LRSAM 5 years, new imported 155 Howitzers 25-30 years, - All this is ok as they are foreign imports or intended foreign imports but we cannot give couple of years to HTT-40 even though HAL is trying to get permission since 1980s.


Scorpene delay falls in MDL's shoulders same thing happened with P-17 so it is not exactly an import issue, Brazilian Scorpene is ready for delivery next year before we even complete ours even though the construction was started 5 years later. Ironically if we had imported them this wouldn't have been an issue.

LRSAM is a brand new system under development so it should come as no surprise it has ran into some issues, even Brahmos ran into delay of couple years before induction in spite of being based on Oniks (which was in development since mid 80s).
Last edited by John on 16 Apr 2013 19:42, edited 1 time in total.

saps
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 03 Sep 2007 18:16
Location: Poor mans Ooty...

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby saps » 16 Apr 2013 19:42

Austin wrote:The young engineer is visibly charged. “We can test the craft by 2015 and go into production mode two years from there.”


But he is not privy to the slipping timeline wrt training requirements and requirements to up the intake....how would one stop gap the period from now till...2018-2020.

Its alright to plan wrt something on drawing board.....but even outcome for sitara was not really promising....despite the initial speed .. its way out of league....

More so not available when it is required as of yesterday...considering the depleting kiran fleet.

Comments gurus.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 16 Apr 2013 19:47

Sagar G wrote:
indranilroy wrote:There is only 1 thing I don't understand about the HTT-40. Why does it have such a low service ceiling of 7 km?


The second last para of the article says 10 km.

Hmmm. Ajai Shukla's report is the only report where the 10 km ceiling is specified. It sounds right. But in all of HAL's posters and tenders, the limit is specified upto 7 kms. But the 10 kms sounds right, unless the cabin is not pressurized. By the way, I am happy to know that you read the whole of a Ajai Shukla blog!

rohitvats wrote:Arre bhai....the phoren plan cost INR 38 Crore and Indian one INR 35 Crore? What gives?

Nothing gives except our misplaced expectation that everything desi will cost drastically less than the firang maal. But if you look at it HTT-40 is equivalent to the PC-9 rather than the PC-7 MkII. The PC-7 MkII costs $8.7M, whereas the PC-9M costs $9.6M. (I am quoting prices from here and here).

Austinji, I can't remember properly, but there was a tender for the oxygen supply of the HTT-40, and that did not looks like OBOGS.

John wrote:First focus on getting Sitara out before jumping into next project.

IJT is in flight testing phase. HTT-40 is is design and development phase (first metal cutting happened in end of 2012). By the time HTT-40 gets to flight testing phase, IJT should have got its FOC. Where is the overlap of personnel?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 16 Apr 2013 19:56

saps wrote:
Austin wrote:The young engineer is visibly charged. “We can test the craft by 2015 and go into production mode two years from there.”


But he is not privy to the slipping timeline wrt training requirements and requirements to up the intake....how would one stop gap the period from now till...2018-2020.

Its alright to plan wrt something on drawing board.....but even outcome for sitara was not really promising....despite the initial speed .. its way out of league....

More so not available when it is required as of yesterday...considering the depleting kiran fleet.

Further ordering of PC-7s is limited to 37. Even if IAF orders the extra 37 now, the planes won't come at a faster rate.

HAL is not asking to stop the training. It is asking that the decision on the next 37 be held back till 2015. If HTT-40 is not flying by then, please go ahead with orders of more PC-7s.

Austin wrote:Here is a Specs of HTT-40
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zPZjuE58Bk8/U ... +BTT-2.jpg


That is actually outdated. Even the specs on HAL's website are outdated. The "engineer" speaking here, spoke at AI'13 and is the head of the HTT-40 project. So he is in the know.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2403
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby John » 16 Apr 2013 20:15

indranilroy wrote:IJT is in flight testing phase. HTT-40 is is design and development phase (first metal cutting happened in end of 2012). By the time HTT-40 gets to flight testing phase, IJT should have got its FOC. Where is the overlap of personnel?


I am not talking about overlap of personnel or resources but rather prove that HAL can actually deliver trainer aircraft before throwing more money at them. i am skeptical Sitara will ever get the clearance any time soon. I would have rather work on getting private firms involved in HTT-40 rather than simply rely on HAL.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Austin » 16 Apr 2013 20:28

indranilroy wrote:That is actually outdated. Even the specs on HAL's website are outdated. The "engineer" speaking here, spoke at AI'13 and is the head of the HTT-40 project. So he is in the know.


So do we know the updated specs ?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 16 Apr 2013 20:34

John wrote:
indranilroy wrote:IJT is in flight testing phase. HTT-40 is is design and development phase (first metal cutting happened in end of 2012). By the time HTT-40 gets to flight testing phase, IJT should have got its FOC. Where is the overlap of personnel?


I am not talking about overlap of personnel or resources but rather prove that HAL can actually deliver trainer aircraft before throwing more money at them. i am skeptical Sitara will ever get the clearance any time soon. I would have rather work on getting private firms involved in HTT-40 rather than simply rely on HAL.

I am worried about the IJT project too. But how will not taking up HTT-40 project ensure the success of IJT project. Or how will taking up the HTT-40 project hinder the IJT project if there is no overlap?

By the look of things HAL is damn serious about IOC for IJT this Dec. I hope AJai Shukla or Anantha Krishnan do a report on the current status of IJT.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 16 Apr 2013 21:11

Austin wrote:
indranilroy wrote:That is actually outdated. Even the specs on HAL's website are outdated. The "engineer" speaking here, spoke at AI'13 and is the head of the HTT-40 project. So he is in the know.


So do we know the updated specs ?

Top speed: 0.5 Mach (600 kmph). Calibrated airspeed is upto 450 kmph.
Ceiling: 7 km (10 km?) (Minimum requirement. Engine has to work at 7 km)
Range: 3000 km (not sure about this one)
Flight duration: 3.5 hours (Minimum requirement for engines continuous operations). (Obviously you can't fly 3000 km in 3.5 hrs at 600 kmph).
Load envelop: -3/+6 Gs

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby vic » 16 Apr 2013 21:17

The exac specifications of HTT-40 will be known after engine is finalized.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2403
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby John » 16 Apr 2013 21:23

indranilroy wrote:I am worried about the IJT project too. But how will not taking up HTT-40 project ensure the success of IJT project. Or how will taking up the HTT-40 project hinder the IJT project if there is no overlap?

By the look of things HAL is damn serious about IOC for IJT this Dec. I hope AJai Shukla or Anantha Krishnan do a report on the current status of IJT.


HAL says it is been serious on IJT since day one. At least dangling a carrot should give HAL more incentive to get the IJT out the door asap so it can get a new project in. Also how do we know HAL has learned from its Al-55 mistake Engine is still a question mark for HTT-40, it's insanity to do the same thing every time and except a different outcome. Lets change it up try something different with HTT-40.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 16 Apr 2013 23:54

John wrote:I would have rather work on getting private firms involved in HTT-40 rather than simply rely on HAL.


Which pvt. firm ??? Name some.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 16 Apr 2013 23:57

indranilroy wrote:By the way, I am happy to know that you read the whole of a Ajai Shukla blog!


Not exactly, the article is posted here so read it. Shooklaw is still lifafa though.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Victor » 17 Apr 2013 00:14

indranilroy wrote:HAL is finding it difficult to find the engines for the HTT-40. It has extended the deadline for replies to its RFP for the engine 3 times (from 25th March to 30th April).

At least P&W will be responding, maybe GE and Honeywell too.

rohitvats wrote:the phoren plan cost INR 38 Crore and Indian one INR 35 Crore? What gives?

Pilatus can amortize its costs over several times the number of planes that HAL can for costing purposes so 35 cr vs 38 cr is pretty good actually. Now after the first lot are done and most of the overhead & fixed costs are taken care of, any follow-on orders will be gravy. Finally, this would be like our own kids "selling" stuff to us and keeping the books just to be pukka. It really doesn't matter who pays who because in the end it's all "our" money as opposed to some foreigner's.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7726
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby rohitvats » 17 Apr 2013 00:24

Victor wrote:<SNIP>
rohitvats wrote:the phoren plan cost INR 38 Crore and Indian one INR 35 Crore? What gives?

Pilatus can amortize its costs over several times the number of planes that HAL can for costing purposes so 35 cr vs 38 cr is pretty good actually. Now after the first lot are done and most of the overhead & fixed costs are taken care of, any follow-on orders will be gravy. Finally, this would be like our own kids "selling" stuff to us and keeping the books just to be pukka. It really doesn't matter who pays who because in the end it's all "our" money as opposed to some foreigner's.


Victor - What you're saying is that PER UNIT Program Cost of HTT-40 is INR 35 Crore while PER UNIT Procurement Cost of Pilatus is INR 38 Crore. If that be the case, then PER UNIT Procurement Cost of HTT-40 should be drastically lower. Unless, HAL is looking to recoup the entire investment only from IAF order.

Which basically means that the total cost envisaged by HAL for HTT-40 Project is INR 35 x 108 = INR 3,740 Crores. If the a/c does not fly by 2015 and IAF order 37 Pilatus, then the PER UNIT Program Cost rises to INR 52.6 Crores.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2403
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby John » 17 Apr 2013 01:02

Sagar G wrote:Which pvt. firm ??? Name some.

Mahindra Aerospace, Tata (venture with UT) and even Reliance is now entering that segment, Mahindra even has a few piston engine aircraft in development thanks to its acquisitions.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 01:17

John wrote:Mahindra Aerospace, Tata (venture with UT) and even Reliance is now entering that segment, Mahindra even has a few piston engine aircraft in development thanks to its acquisitions.


Mahindra and Tata both have Zero experience in designing any kind of aerostructures and Reliance is nowhere to be seen for the moment. So your plan about giving the basic trainer project to a private firm doesn't sound promising enough. If you want to give this another shot come up with names of a few more pvt. firms in India who have the capability to design and develop on there own any kind of flying machine.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 01:23

rohitvats wrote:Which basically means that the total cost envisaged by HAL for HTT-40 Project is INR 35 x 108 = INR 3,740 Crores. If the a/c does not fly by 2015 and IAF order 37 Pilatus, then the PER UNIT Program Cost rises to INR 52.6 Crores.


You have no idea how the costing was done by HAL and yet you come up with such stats. I don't think you are doing it the right way the cost/unit might rise but it won't be the way you are doing it. Plus even if it does to that level as you are calculating then instead of 29 cr. 46.6 cr. will go into Indian economy which is definitely much better than putting 38 cr. into foreign hands.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2013 01:25

John wrote:
Sagar G wrote:Which pvt. firm ??? Name some.

Mahindra Aerospace, Tata (venture with UT) and even Reliance is now entering that segment, Mahindra even has a few piston engine aircraft in development thanks to its acquisitions.

Not the same sir.
1. Mahindra Aerospace is also certifying a turboprop plane (GA-10) and redesigning another (GA-18) to be powered by turboprops. But they are transport planes. That does not fall in the aerobatics category. Also they don't have any components that go into a defense aircraft.
2. Tata has zero design experience. By their own admission, they can build to blue-print. to their credit, they can do it very well and before time.
3. Reliance scores 0 is design and manufacturing.
4. Probably Taneja Aerospace would have been a right partner. They probably are.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7726
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby nachiket » 17 Apr 2013 01:27

Sagar G wrote:Mahindra and Tata both have Zero experience in designing any kind of aerostructures and Reliance is nowhere to be seen for the moment.

And they will continue having zero experience for eternity until they actually work on a project. HTT-40 can be a good starting point. It is nowhere near as complex as the LCA for example, and if they fail, the IAF has a ready option available in an aircraft they would already be using in limited numbers at that point. Some initial monetary and technical help from the government will be necessary. But it can be a good opportunity to invest in the future, unless we want the future to be no different than the present.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Victor » 17 Apr 2013 01:35

Rohit, those are likely life cycle unit costs that MoD is insisting on nowadays I think and HAL will obviously have an edge there. HAL will of course be forced to recoup as much of its costs as it can via the initial 124 from IAF only as it doesn't sell to anyone else and follow-ons are uncertain. If HTT-40 doesn't prove itself by 2015, it will be dead and everything is moot. Pilatus may reduce their price for options beyond the 75 in response to the HAL offer but we should still go with the HTT-40. Even if it turns out a little more expensive, the money stays in the family and we can make the plane do anything we want, unlike the Pilatus. HAL seems very condident here. They have an option for an additional 300 for a total of 400+! They obviously see attack versions, perhaps with the Army.

BTW, a majority of the ongoing costs will be incurred on the engine via repair/overhaul/maintenance and if the HTT-40 and the PC-7 have a lot of commonality there, it makes things much easier for the IAF. On top of that, HAL can ensure that there is minimal difference in the cockpit too so training could be seamless. All of this makes it less painful for the IAF to maintain the logistics for 2 primary trainers.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 01:37

indranilroy wrote:1. Mahindra Aerospace is also certifying a turboprop plane (GA-10) and redesigning another (GA-18) to be powered by turboprops. But they are transport planes. That does not fall in the aerobatics category. Also they don't have any components that go into a defense aircraft.


Excuse me Mahindra Aerospace is doing that !!!!! Have you heard of GippsAero ??? If not then click on the link and get a dose of reality about whose product the planes are. Mahindra Aerospace's first designing experience will be NM-5 and NAL is hand holding it for that.

I am not against pvt. firms entering the aerospace sector but I refuse to daydream about some utopian pvt. firm having aerostructure design capability at this point of time.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 01:42

nachiket wrote:And they will continue having zero experience for eternity until they actually work on a project. HTT-40 can be a good starting point. It is nowhere near as complex as the LCA for example, and if they fail, the IAF has a ready option available in an aircraft they would already be using in limited numbers at that point. Some initial monetary and technical help from the government will be necessary. But it can be a good opportunity to invest in the future, unless we want the future to be no different than the present.


The future will be different when the pvt. firms start putting there money behind R&D in aerospace sector, getting involved in screw driver manufacturing and doing overseas acquisitions doesn't == capability to design aerostructures but yes it's a start. A decade from now hopefully the pvt. firms will be in a better shape so that India can put it's trust on them in sharing the burden of HAL. Just because it has a "Basic" in front of it's name doesn't mean that it will be a cakewalk for pvt. firms who don't even have experience in making those remote controlled toy planes.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2403
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby John » 17 Apr 2013 01:43

As already mentioned nachiket we have to start somewhere and HTT-40 is good start for private firms to get some experiance in this. And no one is calling a pure 100% private venture, even joint venture with HAL would be something different for a change and would greatly improve our overall capabilities.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Victor » 17 Apr 2013 01:48

nachiket wrote:And they will continue having zero experience for eternity until they actually work on a project. HTT-40 can be a good starting point. It is nowhere near as complex as the LCA for example, and if they fail, the IAF has a ready option available in an aircraft they would already be using in limited numbers at that point. Some initial monetary and technical help from the government will be necessary. But it can be a good opportunity to invest in the future, unless we want the future to be no different than the present.

Agree. This would be the perfect project for a private Indian company. Lack of previous experience is totally immaterial. Reliance had zero experience before building their refinery and Tata had zero experience before coming up with their 155mm howitzer. It would be monumentally stupid and short sighted of us to not fully support such companies and give them the starts they need. Even in developed countries, the govt gives money to private companies for focused R&D. Even the biggest military contractors are not expected to spend their own money on this although some do. In return, these companies have their profits managed by the govt.
Last edited by Victor on 17 Apr 2013 01:49, edited 1 time in total.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2013 01:49

Sagar G wrote:
indranilroy wrote:1. Mahindra Aerospace is also certifying a turboprop plane (GA-10) and redesigning another (GA-18) to be powered by turboprops. But they are transport planes. That does not fall in the aerobatics category. Also they don't have any components that go into a defense aircraft.


Excuse me Mahindra Aerospace is doing that !!!!! Have you heard of GippsAero ??? If not then click on the link and get a dose of reality about whose product the planes are. Mahindra Aerospace's first designing experience will be NM-5 and NAL is hand holding it for that.

I am not against pvt. firms entering the aerospace sector but I refuse to daydream about some utopian pvt. firm having aerostructure design capability at this point of time.

Mahindra Aerospace is not even building the NM-5. NAL designed NM-5 and Gipps aero build the prototype using rapid prototyping. It is being test flown and certified in Australia. After certification, Mahindra is going to build NM-5 along with the GA-8/GA-10 and possibly GA-18 in India at factory in Karnataka, north of Bangalore. But are these points relevant to our discussion at hand?

Question is does Mahindra have the expertise to build a aerobatic trainer under its aegis(in India or Australia)? The answer is no.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 01:53

HTT-40 is a project which IAF is desperate to see getting killed and by forcing a JV or some other BS at this point of time down HAL's throat will only make sure that IAF's dream is realised since instead of focusing on the project HAL would be distracted by hand holding/spoonfeeding some pvt. firm. HAL needs to be given clearance at earliest if India wants to manufacture it's own basic trainer. Spoonfeeding of pvt. firms can happen on some other project or later when HTT-40 becomes a reality.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 01:55

indranilroy wrote:Question is does Mahindra have the expertise to build a aerobatic trainer under its aegis(in India or Australia)? The answer is no.


I said the same thing as well. As a matter of fact no Indian pvt. firm does.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2013 01:56

Victor wrote:
nachiket wrote:And they will continue having zero experience for eternity until they actually work on a project. HTT-40 can be a good starting point. It is nowhere near as complex as the LCA for example, and if they fail, the IAF has a ready option available in an aircraft they would already be using in limited numbers at that point. Some initial monetary and technical help from the government will be necessary. But it can be a good opportunity to invest in the future, unless we want the future to be no different than the present.

Agree. This would be the perfect project for a private Indian company. Lack of previous experience is totally immaterial. Reliance had zero experience before building their refinery and Tata had zero experience before coming up with their 155mm howitzer. It would be monumentally stupid and short sighted of us to not fully support such companies and give them the starts they need. Even in developed countries, the govt gives money to private companies for focused R&D. Even the biggest military contractors are not expected to spend their own money on this although some do. In return, these companies have their profits managed by the govt.

One can't blame HAL or MoD for this. It is not their mandate to handhold the Tatas/Mahindras/Reliances. The proposal has to come from them. They very well knew that IAF is going to need BTTs and by 2010. If they wanted to field a competitor to HAL's existent/non-existent trainer, they should submitted a proposal to MoD/IAF. Probably, they should have been helped after that. This exactly what happened for the refineries, NM-5, howitzers, 8X8, 12X12 etc.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2013 01:58

Sagar G wrote:
indranilroy wrote:Question is does Mahindra have the expertise to build a aerobatic trainer under its aegis(in India or Australia)? The answer is no.


I said the same thing as well. As a matter of fact no Indian pvt. firm does.

The opposite side is asking. Could/Should the private sector brought forward using this project. Not who can develop it today.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2013 02:00

Dr. Prodyut Das comments on Ajai Shukla's blog, which I agree whole-heartedly.
Great News and teh way to go!
However the News is ( at present !) too good to be true.

There are enough instances when we have foreclosed promising projects just when we were emerging from the woods.
A likely scenario would be that just when the HTT 40 begins to show promise Pilatus would suddenly "agree" to reduce it's prices and the HTT 40 will be abandoned "due to commercial" considerations.

HAL should plan NOW for selling to all the Third world air forces

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 02:16

Hmmmm reduction of cost, that reminds of this news a bit dated though

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd forces cost cut in Swiss Pilatus trainer jet deal

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Victor » 17 Apr 2013 02:25

Sagar G wrote:HTT-40 is a project which IAF is desperate to see getting killed

I wouldn't be too sure about that. The COAS' broadside came before the Arms Trade Treaty was signed and the IAF will now see "desi" in a very different light. The IAF's disgust is against HAL in particular, not "desi" per se. Same with Army and OFB.

indranilroy wrote:One can't blame HAL or MoD for this. It is not their mandate to handhold the Tatas/Mahindras/Reliances.

Oh but it certainly IS their mandate to CREATE a domestic defence industry with the private sector in that space, same as in any other country. Problem is that they do not for the sole reason of protecting their own turf and this has proved not to be in the nation's interest. HAL built up all it "experience" with the full financial support of the govt without which it would be nowhere today. All it's "profit" is taxpayer money. The idea is for the govt to spread the finance judiciously around and make sure there is meaningful competition among several domestic companies, private and public, to boost efficiency and creativity within the country. This is vastly preferable to paying foreigners while they snicker behind our backs for being so utterly incompetent.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Sagar G » 17 Apr 2013 02:35

Victor wrote:I wouldn't be too sure about that. The COAS' broadside came before the Arms Trade Treaty was signed and the IAF will now see "desi" in a very different light. The IAF's disgust is against HAL in particular, not "desi" per se. Same with Army and OFB.


Let IAF by it's action show that it is serious about indigenization then I would start believing them and what "disgust" are you talking about ??? Do you think that only IAF has stories about HAL and HAL doesn't have stories about IAF ??? If you have seen the crappy whiny presentation by the IAF guy in AI-13 then a small story was also shared by an HAL guy about the mentality running in IAF about desi products. I am sure if HAL does a similar kind of presentation and washes it's dirty linen in public then lot such stories will come out. No organization is perfect neither IAF nor HAL so lets not get into this "disgust" business and work together for an arms import independent India.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Indranil » 17 Apr 2013 02:43

Victor wrote:Oh but it certainly IS their mandate to CREATE a domestic defence industry with the private sector in that space, same as in any other country. Problem is that they do not for the sole reason of protecting their own turf and this has proved not to be in the nation's interest. HAL built up all it "experience" with the full financial support of the govt without which it would be nowhere today. All it's "profit" is taxpayer money. The idea is for the govt to spread the finance judiciously around and make sure there is meaningful competition among several domestic companies, private and public, to boost efficiency and creativity within the country. This is vastly preferable to paying foreigners while they snicker behind our backs for being so utterly incompetent.

If it was 2002 and GoI/IAF took out a tender for the development and supply of 200 BTTs, then all your arguments about bringing up the private sector were good. However it is 2013, and we need planes to start flying by 2015. If we don't, a BTT would not be developed in India till 2035. Given the risks and timelines involved, MoD/HAL is right in giving it the best shot through design and development at HAL.

Besides, if Tata/Mahindra/REliance could foresee the requirement of the howitzer, 8X8, 12X12, NM-5, refineries, etc. etc, then they could see the requirement of BTTs. Why they did not take up the challenge of developing it, I do not know.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Postby Victor » 17 Apr 2013 03:43

Do you think that only IAF has stories about HAL and HAL doesn't have stories about IAF ???

I would put far more weight on the views of a buyer rather than the seller any day, specially when buyers' lives depend on the product. The seller has zero locus standi and can safely be dismissed as the real whiner.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests