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.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19588
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 09 Feb 2013 05:15

Edit
Last edited by Karan M on 09 Feb 2013 05:18, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19588
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 09 Feb 2013 05:17

Avarachan wrote:Karan M, what's your email address? I tried your m35 address a few weeks ago, but it wasn't working. (The message bounced back to me.) Thanks.


Sorry about that, let me check & revert within the day.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 09 Feb 2013 07:04

Karan M, massans are quick in fixing process issues. they have the money to rebound. JSF and Raptor lines would pass off with error corrections. Process maturity maintenance has some corrections as well. some times performance and reliability are way too expensive to correct, especially for new projects... earlier they correct, the better the system. staging and phasing is important for massans, indics, and everyone. every company has faced this maturity problem.

but keeping at lower levels of quality of work and products is not acceptable for a long time. there are limits beyond which even the best of the process will be questioned about its values, and requirements.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2989
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 09 Feb 2013 10:25

Karan M wrote:Surya, agreed. Pande's behaviour was too over the top. See his body language, the manner in which he responded to the HAL guy at the end. Confrontational and absolutely intended to force the issue. When he behaves like this, in front of an international audience, what message does it send? Uncivil and on top of it, come to an international seminar, attended by the international community, looking to pick a fight. This is the sort of attitude which India can do very well without. And on top of it, look at the reaction from both the LCA lady & the HAL guy - emotional, distraught. Just goes to show how upset they'd be at behaviour like this. Instead of motivating teams, people like Pande ensure that the entire development process collapses.

Karan, disappointed that you take a partisan approach. All the IAF is asking is accountability.

Refer here http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=90931 As per the Defence Minister’s reply in Parliament,
one accident involving Su-30 MKI aircraft has taken place on 13.12.2011. Cause of the accident was 'Human Error (Servicing)'.

That Su-30 was on an air test at HAL Nashik after regular overhaul by HAL. No IAF maintenance personnel had touched it. People are human & errors happen, but what was the accountability of HAL? Zero

People die when accidents occur. Injuries are worse than death.

When a plane crashes or a ship collides, the services hold enquires. If it is the pilot/engineer’s fault, their careers are terminated. The CO of INS Prahaar was fired. The CO of INS Talwar on colliding with a merchantman in crowded Mumbai Harbour around 2005 was fired.

What action was taken at HAL against the errant engineers? Nothing. Were they fired? No.

I’m surprised at the naivety of posters who equate IAF’s demand for accountability from PSUs akin to being in bed with private/foreign vendors. When a person argues with his wife, he necessarily does not immediately visit the local CSW or foreign CSW. Or ask foreign CSW to open a 51% owned subsidiary next to his house

DPSU’s have a Brahminical approach, that they’re the only repository of defence knowledge & manufacture of the nation. This approach of restricting our education system made our nation backward until social reformers like Swami Vivekananda, Dayanand Saraswati & countless others opened the education system for all.

All the services want is that DPSU’s are accountable & responsible, that today they are definitely not, in the guise of being the only option.

And services are equally harsh on foreign vendor. IN refused to take delivery of INS Talwar until Russians rectified the faults at their cost. Damages were levied and recovered against second batch of ships. ADm. Nirmal Verma publicly castigated Russian shipyard for Vikramaditya delay.

Mazgaon Dock labour union scuttled JV with other shipyards to reduce build time even though MDL order book is full for 10+ years. Instead of sharing work & reducing build time, ships take inordinately long time to build.

But if IN demands efficiency from MDL, I’m sure BR members will jump to claim IN personnel are in bed with Indian/Foreign CSWs.

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 Discussions

Postby vina » 09 Feb 2013 10:56

KaranM wrote:Sorry sir, I have to disagree here. The Russians are laughing all the way to the bank, still.
FGFA - the single biggest brand new Russian fighter program after Soviet Union breakup? Bankrolled by India.
Sukhoi Corp and Irkut in particular? Kept in business by India with 272 Su-30 MKIs. Not enough? Well there is the Super 30 upgrade.
MiG corp? Resuscitated by IAF orders for 69 odd Upgrades and 45 new planes for the Navy.


Indeed. That is exactly the point . Some of the decisions are pretty idiotic, if you throw in the Natasha dance the Army did for T-72s and the incredibly stupid ( ok. Philip thinks paying $2.3b for a burnt out hulk with dodgy power plant that already exploded once and has been problematic in service in both that and other sister ships and fails in sea trials is a good deal. I just hope that the Navy doesn't keep taking good deals like those) .

I have always maintained this. The Navy puts a home built nuke submarine with home built sonar, cutting edge nuclear tip submarine launched missiles and torpedoes and decoys , stuff which is simply not available for love or money, in the water. While on the other hand, the Air Force goes and buys a turbo prop trainer and the army goes and buys out trucks (and gets mired in a scam, even when we have a globally competitive truck building industry!) . There is a wider point in that I am sure .

Consider this, IA doesn't get howitzers for 30 years and did nothing but whine during that time and sat on their a**es. Same with the IAF with the AJT after HAL proposals for trainers. If that doesn't tell someone about organizational moron-ness, I don't know what else will. Can you imagine any company, private or otherwise, making do with something that is so critical to their operations without doing anything but whining ? They wouldn't last long in this Darwinian world.

But that is something that Air Commodore who made that presentation will not get. It is simply above his pay grade. His job is to maintain the stuff in IAF inventory and do it well. I am sure he does a good job of it. But it is not in his remit to think of things wider than that and he probably doesn't.

That is the job of the MoD, which is staffed largely with cretinous baboons to put it mildly . The IAF and IA attitude can only be fixed by the MoD putting them on notice and knocking their heads together with the DRDO and putting in a formal project management structure and office in place.

But you know what they care more about. Keeping their PSU workforce fed and patronage doled out. Whether those guys are turning the screw drivers for an imported design assembled out of kits and hence magically becomes 100% indigenous or 100% home grown design and engineered product with some imported subsystems (which suddenly becomes magically foreign.. ), doesn't make any difference to them , in their pursuit of some hare brained socialism (AK Anthony had some garbled and deluded rubbish about working class in his speech at AI-2013 for eg, from what I read in The Hindu when he exhorted Indian Private industry to invest in R&D. Talk about delusion.. He wants industry to invest to benefit "working class" and not to make profits !...)

Such is the nature of the beast. For it to be fixed, the Baboons need to be kicked and a Mantri with his head screwed in the right way. That is the place to start . I am hoping atleast that the opposition would raise these issues like the Al-55I Russian story and demand the head of the Baboon who made that call, but no, those guys are on an altogether different trip of taking dips in Kumbh Mela and debating whether the Ram Temple is in their agenda or not . Those guys are even more deluded and unreal than the ones in power .

pushkar.bhat
BRFite
Posts: 337
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby pushkar.bhat » 09 Feb 2013 11:16

I think part of the problem that DPSU's have is the MoU's their Chairman and CEO's sign with MoD. All PSU's are governed by the annual MOU's that they sign with their parent Ministry. The MOU mentions what dividend the PSU will give, what production targets it will achieve and what not else. The Managers of these PSU's (read CMD's, ED and other senior Management) are measured on how they perform vis-a-vis the signed MoU. DPSU's are also governed by the same structure.

The game that HAL, BEL, BEML et al play is the same game that any corporate player will play i.e. Managers maximizing their returns. The Armed forces are they only cash cows that they have and so they will continue to milk the armed forces as long as the management objectives of these DPSU's are not changed. If 100% of the bonus or the variable for the CMD, ED's and Senior Management is changed to successful deliver of defense projects within boundaries of Time, Budget and quality then they will deliver unless constrained by some serious technical issue.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Austin » 09 Feb 2013 11:25

vina wrote:I have always maintained this. The Navy puts a home built nuke submarine with home built sonar, cutting edge nuclear tip submarine launched missiles and torpedoes and decoys , stuff which is simply not available for love or money, in the water.


Sorry to divert from the topic but thats just an airy fairy tale.

There is nothing like a home built nuke submarine , IN has not built even a conventional submarine till date forget a nuke submarine.

The entire Arihant submarine project is just a Russian designed submarine with Russian Nuke reactor inside it confirmed by no less than Adm Prakash. Even the Russian amb mentioned that Arihant submarine will have acoustic quitening of Akula class submarine ( Russian Typhoon class SSBN )

The truly indiginous thing inside the submarine which was designed and developed by Indian R&D are its Sonar and SLBM. Many components were procured from indian industry but it was built to specification from Rubin that designed Arihant class. The entire command control system inside it comes from Russia .......its really a project of strategic nature that no one will ever talk in depth.

And it only came when Indian BARC 25 years led effort failed and an audit in 1999 post POK-2 led GOI to dump it and take the Russian assistance as Triad was key to Indian N survivibility and it had to come in shortest possible time.

Look at submarine development around the world it takes 40-50 years to reach an acoustic quitening of Akula class , check ONI estimates on Chinese SSBN which are indiginous in nature and where they stand in acoustic quitening similar to Delta 1 class of 60's ..........wonder how we managed to jump ahead without even designing a single conventional submarine till date ?

Bottom line is no one does a favour on Russian , US, French or any one when it comes to import , we import because our indian industry/R&D etc cannot build on time that can meet operational needs of Indian Defence Forces , where they build they cannot maintain at the level the force desires , so the whole notion that we are bankrolling some companies by doing a big favour is not true , we bank roll them coz we cant do it on our own ......its a forced choice not a happy one though but its a fact of life.

debm
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 6
Joined: 06 Dec 2008 13:09

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby debm » 09 Feb 2013 12:22

I have been lurking in this forum for many years now, but I am no expert and rarely post.

So as I understand the majority of people here blame IAF for poor quality of service offered to them

So a product development organization, whose primary purpose is to develop customized products as per user specs, Its ok to have totally messed up project management, risk management, quality management for its project.

While a frontline service, whose primary service is to fight wars, is supposed to have most product development departments/sections(starting from project management to after sales servicing) to hand hold psu's to get their job done.

And we are supposed to blame IAF if products/service fall short of their expectations and they are not supposed to complain, as that would degrade the image of our PSU's who have setup nice glossy stalls to sell their items to visiting foreigners.

So net result is that we will have a under performing IAF with significant sections of its resources not in operation at wartime due to inadequate servicing capabilities in the support companies

So I guess its complete acceptable to us, if half of IAF gets wiped out in an event of war.(thou I am not sure that IAF will be at all capable to handle anything more than a very limited war)

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Boreas » 09 Feb 2013 13:49

debm wrote:So as I understand the majority of people here blame IAF for poor quality of service offered to them

So a product development organization, whose primary purpose is to develop customized products as per user specs, Its ok to have totally messed up project management, risk management, quality management for its project.

1. What are your views about F-35 project.
2. Why you think USAF only have <200 F22's?
3. How do you compare LCA experience with EuroFighter development cycle?

The more you will look around the more messing up will you encounter. It just happens, else by now we would have terminator type armies roaming all around the world.

I don't side with those who say we should blame IAF, however I do feel that you have to understand HAL or DRDO are not the masters of their own destiny, a lion share of actual pace of execution depends on wisdom, will and foresight of babus, which inturn depend on commitment of their political masters.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 09 Feb 2013 15:17

^^^^ Which in turn depends on the ethos that is India. :(

debm
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 6
Joined: 06 Dec 2008 13:09

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby debm » 09 Feb 2013 15:25

Boreas wrote:1. What are your views about F-35 project.
2. Why you think USAF only have <200 F22's?
3. How do you compare LCA experience with EuroFighter development cycle?

The more you will look around the more messing up will you encounter. It just happens, else by now we would have terminator type armies roaming all around the world.


So you mean to say that USAF got stuck at 200 F22's due to lack of service support and they don't have ROH infrastructure setup

So did you mean LM having troubles with over ambitious F35 meaning, we as a country even 65 years after independence we still have to import air dropped dumb bombs from outside. Sorry to say You are comparing apples to oranges. I know projects do fail everywhere and things go wrong, but that doesn't justify the GROSS inefficiencies reported in the video

Thats exactly the attitude that organizations like DRDO and HAL hide behind, to justify their continued failures. We can always refer to some neighbors son who failed in Mtech, to justify why my own kid failed in 2nd grade in school.

When we ask IAF(or any other service) to accept a sub optimal/under developed product to support our indigenous labs/industry, we assume there will be a mark2 (improved version) available quickly enough so that operational preparedness is not hampered. I am amazed to hear in the video that Rohini radars, which IAF was made to accept, still have the issues more than a decade after deployment, meaning there was no follow up program or the initiative to have a better version. And all this while we have beating our chests in pride and counting Rohini as an remarkable example of indigenous development.

Sorry sir, we have been hearing the hal/drdo excuses in media for too long, the IAF presentation had more real facts.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby manum » 09 Feb 2013 15:45

So you mean to say...its our right that since we have air force....We shall be producing what nots...after 65 years of whatever...

What we are trying to imply here is you dont born great...very often...

Its a time taking process which is also not streamlined...so itll take a give and take relationship...

What IAF demands is legit...but they are not just customers...bombs and planes are not exactly sold in groceries...

IAF will have to work with context...and make it favourable for themselves...

mody
BRFite
Posts: 709
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby mody » 09 Feb 2013 16:38

There are multitude of problems affecting the whole indigenous defense production in India.
Following are the points that I think need correction:

1). There needs to be a Strategic Defense review, like that carried out in UK, once every decade.
2). The procurement, purchase of defense hardware should be as per the review, based on what capability we want to possess.
Core technology areas that need development, should also be identified and DRDO's efforts should be directed at these core areas only. The rest of the non-core systems may be procured from where ever available in the world. The indigenisation of the same can take place, only for cost or spares and product support reasons, if required.
3). The services should be much more involved with the product development, right from the conception, till the final hand over of the system. We have seen many instances of over ambitious GSQR/ASQR being drafted for various systems. The DRDO has also been guilty of overestimating its capability and agreeing to "impossible to produce, within a reasonable time frame", technical specs.
Officers drafting impossible GSQR should be held accountable. Case in point would be the 81 mm mortar. The weight and Range requirements given in the GSQR were later found to be impossible to achieve. But this was acknowledged, only when the Israeli's told us so.
4). The DPSU's should be moved out of MoD control.
5). The DPSU's and the OFBs should be made to compete with private industry as well as amongst themselves. The later especially for OFBs.
6). The monopoly of DPSU's in defense production has to end. Even the DRDO has complained about this and had alluded to being given an option to choose the manufacturing partner, for the products it develops, rather then the MoD, dictating which DPSU, it has to hand over the production to.
7). 100% FDI in defense should be allowed, with a clause that atleast 70% by value of product has to be produced or sourced from India. The percentage can be increased, depending on the scale of the project. We can also put in clauses with regards to specific technology, that needs to be produced within the country. For example if MTU agrees to setup a factory in India, to produce complete engines, why not. Its a win-win for both. MTU will not find a customer willing to buy upto 1,500 MTU 893 type of engines and its various smaller derivatives numbering between 2,000-5,000 nos, in the world. If they are willing to setup a wholly owned subsidiary in India, producing atleast 80-90% by value of the engine, in India, I would say please go ahead.
The foreign companies can be free to tie up with or source products from any Indian company.
We can also explore the possibility of DRDO developed products being manufactured by foreign firms, if they set up a manufacturing plant for the same in India. Necessary safe guard for Intellectual Property and high technology stuff should be taken.
8). All product purchase agreements signed by the services, whether with Indian DPSU's, Indian private companies or foreign vendors, should include an iron clad after sales and spares supply agreement, covering the nominal life cycle of the product.

Last post on this topic. The LCA thread has completely gone off on a tangent.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby manum » 09 Feb 2013 18:11

+1....

Its gone off the tangent...because its sole customer almost rejected the LCA progress...

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_23694 » 09 Feb 2013 18:54

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
IAF will never and cannot reject LCA that is for sure based on the current status of LCA and future Mk.2 version , until and unless there is some critical blunder by the developer/manufacturer.
Having said that the real sense of satisfaction for the manufacturer will be (in whichever way) when the IAF fields them right at the front line and not at Sulur.
This confidence building will be a gradual process and every one need to play there part. HAL/ADA should not crib at a few comments here and there and focus on the task at hand. IAF on its part get the best possible machine to defend the country and if asked/required support the LCA / AMCA development
Public criticism will followed by public appreciation :D HAL/ADA, take it as a challenge . It is the expectation that leads to criticism . F 35 would have been a front line fighter for many countries long time back, it is the just that it has to meet the standards of UsAF that is leading to delays and criticism. So the day IAF enthusiastically starts inducting indigenous fighters , HAL/ADA engineers can be rest assured that they are making one of the best fighters which is serving one of the best AF in the world.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Boreas » 09 Feb 2013 19:18

debm wrote:So you mean to say that USAF got stuck at 200 F22's due to lack of service support and they don't have ROH infrastructure setup

So did you mean LM having troubles with over ambitious F35 meaning, we as a country even 65 years after independence we still have to import air dropped dumb bombs from outside. Sorry to say You are comparing apples to oranges. I know projects do fail everywhere and things go wrong, but that doesn't justify the GROSS inefficiencies reported in the video

Thats exactly the attitude that organizations like DRDO and HAL hide behind, to justify their continued failures. We can always refer to some neighbors son who failed in Mtech, to justify why my own kid failed in 2nd grade in school.

I am not comparing apple and oranges, I am not even comparing two different breeds of apples. Building an aircraft is a complex art, and I have given you practical examples that throughout the sphere of human race these projects are getting delayed and none was able to completely achieve all there design goals. So if you come and decide to discredit our achivements don't expect me to buy it.

If we as a country after 65 years of independance are capable of making ICBM's, SLBM's, long range radars and wide array of other war fighting equipments, than one can conclude that we have made respectable amount of progress.

So even though it is ur concern that we have to buy dumb bombs (which is incorrect), I would say and no sane person will disagree, a research organisation who can develop a 8000 km range missile can most certainly produce all kind of bombs. We had correctly defined our priorities and achived self-reliance on critical tech which no one else is going to give us. In due course of time we will be able to produce rest of the nuts and bolts as well.

debm wrote:When we ask IAF(or any other service) to accept a sub optimal/under developed product to support our indigenous labs/industry, we assume there will be a mark2 (improved version) available quickly enough so that operational preparedness is not hampered. I am amazed to hear in the video that Rohini radars, which IAF was made to accept, still have the issues more than a decade after deployment, meaning there was no follow up program or the initiative to have a better version. And all this while we have beating our chests in pride and counting Rohini as an remarkable example of indigenous development.

Sorry sir, we have been hearing the hal/drdo excuses in media for too long, the IAF presentation had more real facts.

Are you kidding me?? You think defense preparedness is strengthen by importing everything?

Why you think we are buying french scorpene sub, when cleraly having an Ohio or Virginia class sub will increase the defense preparedness of navy by manifolds? Why don't we buy ELTA ASEA from israel? And why is that the javelin deal still hung in space?

We should be proud that we have rohini and even if it has issues for one more decade, we should fix those issues and continue using it. So that after 2 decades we have a perfect product of our own, which in next iteration can surpass the other contemporary radars.

Be appreciative of what our defense institutions are giving to this nation. When we buy a Rafale we scare only porkies. But when we devleop a LCA or AMCA we scare not only prokis but also french, americans and likewise. Than they start respecting us.

debm
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 6
Joined: 06 Dec 2008 13:09

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby debm » 09 Feb 2013 20:49

@Boreas

Did I say anything about importing? I dont support importing,
I am absolutely for indigenous development. But we should not support blindly. Just see what is happening, IAF placed valid issues, no body has an answer, HAL is busy counting revenue. MOD is sleeping and does not hear anything, and would not be able to hear anything which requires action as elections are coming. And the issues are overflowing in Public (thats a warning sign that things are pretty bad inside)

Current issues mentioned by IAF, are service and support issues and I see no points(posted by you or anyone else) that can be justified against it. If the industry is not able to support ALH and Rohini today, nobody can trust them to support LCA. Anyway, LCA is still far far away and as per IAF there are hardly any technical documentations available (service manuals, maintenance docs etc) which is must for them to have that bird in active operation. So I guess no one is worried that much LCA now.

Oh, and I completely forgot, HAL will not get CKD/SKD kits from russia/france to assemble this birds(they have to build an assembly line for this!!!! OMG, this is unbearable pain for HAL), so the production rate will be roughly close to the LSP production rate, which is what? 8/9 planes in 10 years. Oh, we have lot of time before a Full squadron gets deployed. I am sure IAF is not worried about LCA.

And regarding, we cannot make air ammunitions (we do some limited production) but most is imported. I completely agree that a country capable of producing long range ballistic missile have enough capabilities to develop air ammunitions for its forces. The limit as you would see is not actually technical rather that our indigenous defence industry simply does not care

Just a few lines from a report (I got to see the report in another recent thread in this forum)


http://www.aerospaceindia.org/Air%20Pow ... er%202.pdf

Page 21 of the PDF, second last paragraph

The fuzes for the aviation bombs were developed by ARDE. However,
their usage has been discontinued as incidents of air burst occurred due to
certain design deficiencies. The ARDE was initially reluctant to accept that
there were deficiencies in design. However, by the time ARDE accepted
the need to design the fuzes in the fail safe mode, the IAF had stopped
using these fuzes and adapted a Russian origin fuze as the common fuze
for all bombs. Regarding the live ammunition for aircraft guns, OFB is
unable to make this due to difficulties in quality assurance problems for
fuzes. Therefore, the live ammunition is being imported and the practice
ammunition is being made in India.



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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby saps » 09 Feb 2013 21:00

debm wrote:Quote:

http://www.aerospaceindia.org/Air%20Pow ... er%202.pdf

Page 21 of the PDF, second last paragraph

The fuzes for the aviation bombs were developed by ARDE. However,
their usage has been discontinued as incidents of air burst occurred due to
certain design deficiencies. The ARDE was initially reluctant to accept that
there were deficiencies in design. However, by the time ARDE accepted
the need to design the fuzes in the fail safe mode, the IAF had stopped
using these fuzes and adapted a Russian origin fuze as the common fuze


I think i recollect the disaster....loss of life of one tremendous gentleman.....for no reason or rhyme...

I am not sure if anyone was held accountable for that....blame it as occupational hazard....

Unless you have ppl from both ends sitting and sorting out things....guess its unrecoverable situation here.......but the folks losing most sleep have actually no contribution......or first hand exposure..of things happening as of NOW.

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 557
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Avarachan » 10 Feb 2013 00:05

Austin wrote:
vina wrote:I have always maintained this. The Navy puts a home built nuke submarine with home built sonar, cutting edge nuclear tip submarine launched missiles and torpedoes and decoys , stuff which is simply not available for love or money, in the water.


Sorry to divert from the topic but thats just an airy fairy tale.

There is nothing like a home built nuke submarine , IN has not built even a conventional submarine till date forget a nuke submarine.

The entire Arihant submarine project is just a Russian designed submarine with Russian Nuke reactor inside it confirmed by no less than Adm Prakash. Even the Russian amb mentioned that Arihant submarine will have acoustic quitening of Akula class submarine ( Russian Typhoon class SSBN )

The truly indiginous thing inside the submarine which was designed and developed by Indian R&D are its Sonar and SLBM. Many components were procured from indian industry but it was built to specification from Rubin that designed Arihant class. The entire command control system inside it comes from Russia .......its really a project of strategic nature that no one will ever talk in depth.

And it only came when Indian BARC 25 years led effort failed and an audit in 1999 post POK-2 led GOI to dump it and take the Russian assistance as Triad was key to Indian N survivibility and it had to come in shortest possible time.

Look at submarine development around the world it takes 40-50 years to reach an acoustic quitening of Akula class , check ONI estimates on Chinese SSBN which are indiginous in nature and where they stand in acoustic quitening similar to Delta 1 class of 60's ..........wonder how we managed to jump ahead without even designing a single conventional submarine till date ?

Bottom line is no one does a favour on Russian , US, French or any one when it comes to import , we import because our indian industry/R&D etc cannot build on time that can meet operational needs of Indian Defence Forces , where they build they cannot maintain at the level the force desires , so the whole notion that we are bankrolling some companies by doing a big favour is not true , we bank roll them coz we cant do it on our own ......its a forced choice not a happy one though but its a fact of life.


+1.

ADDED LATER: Austin, I agree with your general point, but calling the Arihant project "just a Russian designed submarine" is going too far, I think. I do not study naval issues, but there are things about the Arihant that strike me as being very Indian: the flexibility of it, for instance. It was probably an Indian which came up with the idea of it being a hybrid between a boomer sub and a hunter-killer. (Thanks to Vina for pointing that out in an earlier post.)

However, I agree with your general point: there is no way that the Arihant would be as advanced as it is without *significant* Russian help. For all of the people getting upset about Indian funding of Russian projects, keep in mind that Russia has provided significant technical assistance to India over the years, when no one else would. Indians and Russians should both be mature about the relationship, and analyze its good and bad aspects in a calm, clear way.
Last edited by Avarachan on 10 Feb 2013 09:01, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 10 Feb 2013 02:00

I think we need to fight a real war to v&v everything.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2342
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 10 Feb 2013 02:38

Indians can make everything! Corruption is the enemy. People who worship other countrys' products over their own (like some on this forum) are the enemy!! What's the use of having a super-dee-dooper fighter when there are conditions on who you can fight with, how you can use it etc? Some give far too much credit for the Arihant to the Russians! Some scientists have also made statements that counter what Adm Arun prakash claims. If Arihant is Russian, then why hasn't it gone for sea trials in 3 years? Why is the reactor not yet critical!

We need to weed out these fan boys amongst us who do their darndest to put down products like LCA, Arihant and Arjun. Their self flagellation on behalf of their masters does us no good. We all well remember their worship of their idol the T-90 which the Arjun thrashed resoundingly!

The CAS's criticism of DRDO reeks of CYA! What has he done to beef up fleet strength in so many years. 20 years to decide the AJT, a decade to select the MRCA and now how many more years to sign the contract? If the political masters are moving slowly, then the chief must take his plight to the public! The IAF and IA have done a very poor job of building a military industrial complex!

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 10 Feb 2013 02:58

Austin wrote:...

Bottom line is no one does a favour on Russian , US, French or any one when it comes to import , we import because our indian industry/R&D etc cannot build on time that can meet operational needs of Indian Defence Forces , where they build they cannot maintain at the level the force desires , so the whole notion that we are bankrolling some companies by doing a big favour is not true , we bank roll them coz we cant do it on our own ......its a forced choice not a happy one though but its a fact of life.


So the question arises, how does India attain self sufficiency (70 indigenous - 30 import) of the level required by the armed forces if support for indigenous R&D ceases? How will India be able to develop the latest tech defence products (i.e. "5th Gen", etc) if R&D stops at "1st Gen"? In this type of scenario, India will never be able to compete with Western/Russian products; import will always be the preferred path. How can India compete with countries that have 50+ years head start?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 10 Feb 2013 06:06

brute force! have a bunch of dependent nations that are forced to buy products. for that we need to start influencing countries and be a honest guardian. we need to grow up on many fronts and not in-fight. like mr pillai says, if one indic scientists works, he makes it brilliance.. and two of them joined together creates a big problem.. and they solved that by 1-1 with russian partners on brahmos. may be he is sending a message to buckle up, and survive or perish just on the dreams.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2013 06:13

srai wrote:
Austin wrote:...

Bottom line is no one does a favour on Russian , US, French or any one when it comes to import , we import because our indian industry/R&D etc cannot build on time that can meet operational needs of Indian Defence Forces , where they build they cannot maintain at the level the force desires , so the whole notion that we are bankrolling some companies by doing a big favour is not true , we bank roll them coz we cant do it on our own ......its a forced choice not a happy one though but its a fact of life.


So the question arises, how does India attain self sufficiency (70 indigenous - 30 import) of the level required by the armed forces if support for indigenous R&D ceases? How will India be able to develop the latest tech defence products (i.e. "5th Gen", etc) if R&D stops at "1st Gen"? In this type of scenario, India will never be able to compete with Western/Russian products; import will always be the preferred path. How can India compete with countries that have 50+ years head start?

By investing heavily in R&D in colleges/universities. To built a skyscraper you seed a solid base and it starts by honing talent in colleges/universities.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_22539 » 10 Feb 2013 07:35

Vivek K wrote:Indians can make everything! Corruption is the enemy. People who worship other countrys' products over their own (like some on this forum) are the enemy!! What's the use of having a super-dee-dooper fighter when there are conditions on who you can fight with, how you can use it etc? Some give far too much credit for the Arihant to the Russians! Some scientists have also made statements that counter what Adm Arun prakash claims. If Arihant is Russian, then why hasn't it gone for sea trials in 3 years? Why is the reactor not yet critical!

We need to weed out these fan boys amongst us who do their darndest to put down products like LCA, Arihant and Arjun. Their self flagellation on behalf of their masters does us no good. We all well remember their worship of their idol the T-90 which the Arjun thrashed resoundingly!

The CAS's criticism of DRDO reeks of CYA! What has he done to beef up fleet strength in so many years. 20 years to decide the AJT, a decade to select the MRCA and now how many more years to sign the contract? If the political masters are moving slowly, then the chief must take his plight to the public! The IAF and IA have done a very poor job of building a military industrial complex!


+1 Whiners and fanboys are like some kind of venereal disease that affects this forum (and any other public platform in India), they just don't take a hint and buzz off.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2013 07:43

<DELETED> :mrgreen:

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 557
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Avarachan » 10 Feb 2013 09:00

Austin wrote:
vina wrote:I have always maintained this. The Navy puts a home built nuke submarine with home built sonar, cutting edge nuclear tip submarine launched missiles and torpedoes and decoys , stuff which is simply not available for love or money, in the water.


Sorry to divert from the topic but thats just an airy fairy tale.

There is nothing like a home built nuke submarine , IN has not built even a conventional submarine till date forget a nuke submarine.

The entire Arihant submarine project is just a Russian designed submarine with Russian Nuke reactor inside it confirmed by no less than Adm Prakash. Even the Russian amb mentioned that Arihant submarine will have acoustic quitening of Akula class submarine ( Russian Typhoon class SSBN )

The truly indiginous thing inside the submarine which was designed and developed by Indian R&D are its Sonar and SLBM. Many components were procured from indian industry but it was built to specification from Rubin that designed Arihant class. The entire command control system inside it comes from Russia .......its really a project of strategic nature that no one will ever talk in depth.


Austin, I agree with your general point, but calling the Arihant project "just a Russian designed submarine" is going too far, I think. I do not study naval issues, but there are things about the Arihant which strike me as being very Indian: the flexibility of it, for instance. It was probably an Indian which came up with the idea of it being a hybrid between a boomer sub and a hunter-killer. (Thanks to Vina for pointing that out in an earlier post.)

However, I agree with your general point: there is no way that the Arihant would be as advanced as it is without *significant* Russian help. For all of the people getting upset about Indian funding of Russian projects, keep in mind that Russia has provided significant technical assistance to India over the years, when no one else would. Indians and Russians should both be mature about the relationship, and analyze its good and bad aspects in a calm, clear way.

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SagarAg » 10 Feb 2013 09:43

Avarachan wrote:However, I agree with your general point: there is no way that the Arihant would be as advanced as it is without *significant* Russian help. For all of the people getting upset about Indian funding of Russian projects, keep in mind that Russia has provided significant technical assistance to India over the years, when no one else would. Indians and Russians should both be mature about the relationship, and analyze its good and bad aspects in a calm, clear way.

Rest assured. :)
http://youtu.be/PhlXC3jvY0g?t=44s
:twisted:

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7730
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 10 Feb 2013 11:21

Vivek K wrote:<SNIP> The CAS's criticism of DRDO reeks of CYA! What has he done to beef up fleet strength in so many years. 20 years to decide the AJT, a decade to select the MRCA and now how many more years to sign the contract? If the political masters are moving slowly, then the chief must take his plight to the public! The IAF and IA have done a very poor job of building a military industrial complex!


:roll: :roll: :roll:

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby vishvak » 10 Feb 2013 17:53

About issues, wasn't there a report of an issue during one test flight in Leh?

How did any Russians come into the picture here?

Is any criticism due to this issue then it is Indians who have to resolve the issue. Is that an issue with under performing engine here or, in other words, an engine which is considered normal underperforms in environments? Is an engine considered over-powered usually suffices for this as an elegant and simple solution? Instead of underpoerforming engines, how to set up a production facility for a Russian engine here. That would definitely be better than 'arrangement' of engine purchase in general. It is not against engine per se, but one has to avoid buying foreign goods that do not meet what is needed to be done in environments, especially expensive engines. Why not set up an LCA prototype with overpowered engine to test in usual conditions in general and different environments later on? It would not affect current set up in anyway.

Suggesting here to rather delete posts concerning Russia because hardly anything deals with Russia here. It is perhaps habitual when there is nothing here related and therefore going tangentially. We are used to criticize but this makes little sense. If issues are related to engines from USA, there is no point spreading blame around and including indigenous projects. Meaning this makes no sense at all.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4464
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby putnanja » 10 Feb 2013 21:51

livefist has the display board in LCA Mk-II ...

Image

member_23360
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_23360 » 10 Feb 2013 22:17

vishvak wrote:About issues, wasn't there a report of an issue during one test flight in Leh?

How did any Russians come into the picture here?

Is any criticism due to this issue then it is Indians who have to resolve the issue. Is that an issue with under performing engine here or, in other words, an engine which is considered normal underperforms in environments? Is an engine considered over-powered usually suffices for this as an elegant and simple solution? Instead of underpoerforming engines, how to set up a production facility for a Russian engine here. That would definitely be better than 'arrangement' of engine purchase in general. It is not against engine per se, but one has to avoid buying foreign goods that do not meet what is needed to be done in environments, especially expensive engines. Why not set up an LCA prototype with overpowered engine to test in usual conditions in general and different environments later on? It would not affect current set up in anyway.

Suggesting here to rather delete posts concerning Russia because hardly anything deals with Russia here. It is perhaps habitual when there is nothing here related and therefore going tangentially. We are used to criticize but this makes little sense. If issues are related to engines from USA, there is no point spreading blame around and including indigenous projects. Meaning this makes no sense at all.


+1

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 10 Feb 2013 22:29

^^from livefist again:

Image

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4464
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby putnanja » 10 Feb 2013 22:38

The LiveFist pic of the LCA-MKII info board mentions the LCA -MkII length as 13.70m, a 0.5m increase for Mk-I.

Wonder what the expected fuel volume and consequent range increase is, compared to Mk-I? Wish ADA had put up those numbers too.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby manum » 10 Feb 2013 22:51

Why I am having a feeling that rather getting first tranche of MK1...we'll have to wait for MK2 i.e. around 2015-16...

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 11 Feb 2013 02:15

that is because of the slow process of certifications and operational clearance. this is a pain for all first time process and operational requirements. now, mk.2 will be much faster as only those newer parts need clearance and certifications, and the complete system op clearance.

wilson_th
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 03 Jul 2009 14:16

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby wilson_th » 11 Feb 2013 07:42

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... test-pilot


"Everything is a test till the system is perfected," said Suneet, about the recent failure of the LCA in high-altitude tests. "We didn't fail but we found faults and now we can make the system better," he added.


SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 11 Feb 2013 07:52

only with failures, comes the learning.

but having designed for failures, and doing it early in the lifecycle helps reduce big cost for the future.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5838
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Dileep » 11 Feb 2013 08:07

We didn't fail but we found faults and now we can make the system better


To quote myself.

Who flew her, never complained about her
Who complained about her, never flew her.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Surya » 11 Feb 2013 08:58

yea but I wonder how many of these systems could have awaited a later tranche

The former fighter pilot said the ground pressure refuelling system has been integrated in the latest models of the LCA since 2012, which allows the fuel tank of the plane to be filled in about five minutes, unlike the older models which took more than 30 minutes to fill up fuel on ground.


how many existing IAF aircraft have this now??


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests