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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 10 Sep 2013 16:46

gtre failed us terribly


Only in relation to the LCA.

I still have not found an answer why it is otherwise a failure. Waiting for an answer.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 10 Sep 2013 19:04

saps wrote: How does firm order affect the acquisition plan wrt DPP and purchases ?

IF IAF does put in buy order for 80 ac straight way and then due to issues they are not delivered; to be employed operationally as required, what does that mean. Maneuvering space available for more immediate buys from open market.

Just trying to fathom this cautious approach of IAF when the goal post is just (nearly) one free kick away now.


You are comparing a mature product from the stable of an established manufacturer versus LCA produced by HAL.

Just because HAL says XYZ aircraft will be ready by certain time frame, does not mean that they will be. Same goes for the FOC date.

Further, HAL needs to cut its teeth in delivering a complex product from ground up. Let them get their SOPs correct and iron out any issues raised with respect to a/c in squadron service before HAL starts producing 100s of them fighters.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 10 Sep 2013 21:28

rohitvats wrote:
saps wrote: How does firm order affect the acquisition plan wrt DPP and purchases ?

IF IAF does put in buy order for 80 ac straight way and then due to issues they are not delivered; to be employed operationally as required, what does that mean. Maneuvering space available for more immediate buys from open market.

Just trying to fathom this cautious approach of IAF when the goal post is just (nearly) one free kick away now.


You are comparing a mature product from the stable of an established manufacturer versus LCA produced by HAL.

Just because HAL says XYZ aircraft will be ready by certain time frame, does not mean that they will be. Same goes for the FOC date.

Further, HAL needs to cut its teeth in delivering a complex product from ground up. Let them get their SOPs correct and iron out any issues raised with respect to a/c in squadron service before HAL starts producing 100s of them fighters.


I agree RV. But I feel that with the economic downturn the screws need to be applied on whoever is not delivering.

I base my optimism on the wonderous, innovative methods that our armed forces have used to optimise whatever they have in hand. Proof of the pudding is in the past!

And have in recent times risen to the occasion when they have been war gaming with other countries. Add to that, we still have people, maybe not in the right places, but with enough intellect to contribute at HAL or other DPSUs. When and if (sighs: big IF) they are given the freedom to apply themselves, we can pull ourselves out of this mess.

And verily even improve the current force levels of the IAF.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 10 Sep 2013 22:03

The question I have is: Is the LCA so deficient that in its current form the IAF JUST cannot use it? I do not think so. I think it has some deficiencies that need to be worked on. But, it is mature enough to be start of in the IAF and as time goes along the kinks can be ironed out.

It would be very nice if the dates are met, but even if they are not met, at this stage, the plane should be enough for use at the new AF base.

The fact that they are starting production and hope to have a few production ones out by this year end is indication that the plan is to have the IAF start using them and then work in parallel with the IOC-2 and FOC. Where the LCA is, that should be a great, workable plan.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 10 Sep 2013 22:08

+1 I think the IAF should play around with a couple of them. Or take a couple of test pilots as part of the squadron at Sulur.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 10 Sep 2013 22:20

This plane has gone beyond test pilot stage. IMHO they need to open the gates and let it flood the AFB. No better way to beat issues than to get feedback from userS. It is going to have problems - check out the MiG-35, great designer, great manufacturer, experience galore, what is missing at MiG/Russia for a plane like that to be two years late? Crap it happens to even the best. And we are grumbling?

Ordering a large number is not going to impact the IOC/FOC - not meant to. What it will impact is the procurement, supply chain, numbers made per year, per plane cost and such. And at this point in time, it should be relatively low risk. There is some risk, but worth taking it.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sagar G » 10 Sep 2013 22:33

From Aeromag Jan-Feb issue carrying ADA director's interview

Could you share your thoughts on the roadmap for the LCA-Tejas programme and the milestones you are looking going forward to?

After the IOC clearance, we are going to work towards FOC in which we will envisage the flight envelope of the aircraft from the 22 degree of angular attack to 24 degree of attack and the manuevering of the aircraft from 6 g to 8 g. Also we will integrate new missiles. For FOC we have to achieve the inflight refueling, which will give extended flying hours. And towards FOC target realisation we are integrating a 23 mm gun and also some other conventional weapons indicated by the Air Force. So before the FOC completion, all these activities are achievable. By 2014 December we will achieve full FOC reaching all objectives and that will see 20 Aircraft ordered by IAF. We hope that within about five years, the 40 aircraft ordered by IAF 20 in the IOC configuration and 20 in the FOC clearance configuration can be delivered. And during this process, some refinement of the software and some of the hardware if necessary will also be done.


Is the LSP-6 going to have an IFR probe and is that the reason why it is taking such a long time ???

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 10 Sep 2013 23:18

rohitvats wrote:You want production order to be increased for a product which is yet to enter service from a manufacturer who is rolling out the first high performance aircraft?

Yes it is their first time, and they will have to bust their balls to get it through. But they will have to do it anyway.
You do realize that the first squadron to enter service will be used to iron out any issues in the aircraft. And that is why it is being raised in Sulur.

If everything goes to plan the LAC will achieve FoC by end of next year. Any large production rate increase will take years to to achieve. So even if HAL has been given the orders its unlikely that they will be able to produce any more than the one pre-FoC squadron. Every fighter after that will be post-FoC config.
As for incentive for HAL - well, if we're talking about incentives for HAL as a manufacturer, we need to factor into account the requirements of the operator as well. The aircraft to enter first squadron and their subsequent exploitation by line fighter pilots will decide on the SOP for further squadron. An aircraft adopting FOC is not the be-all and end-all of the development.

So the IAF is going to use the handful of LCAs it has ordered to check if this indigenous fighter, which was specifically designed for them, actually fits into its plans. Only then is the IAF, which is facing chronic shortage of fighters, going to order more of them, if at all. Is that what you're saying?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 10 Sep 2013 23:28

NRao wrote:Did not the DRDO Chief just state that the production and IOC/FOC is going on in parallel? That the first LCA should be out in mid 2014? That the production rate is 16-20 per year?

Just asking.

It won't start off at 16-20 per year, that will take some years(3-4 years?). Our target must be more like 40 or so and this will take time(say 4-5 years). But a decision will have to be taken now if we are to maximize the numbers.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sanku » 10 Sep 2013 23:52

Has anyone stopped to consider that the inducting the LCA in current stage (assuming magically that there are indeed planes ready to be inducted, which in itself seems questionable) -- means that there may be a high fatality rate amongst the air crew since the basic IOC clearance is not done?

Unless of course people think that IOC norms are not really required for operationalization. In which case can some one please list which parameters that LCA does not meet and how bypassing them is ok?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 11 Sep 2013 00:11

Sanku wrote:HAL does not need financial justification. It is a DPSU fully working off MoD. It can make the necessary investments through MoD.

This "necessary investment" is an IAF order via the MoD.
However one CAN NOT make a high capacity production before they make a LSP run.

The learning from LSP run is critical before a manufacturing line can be built. Manufacturing involves its own learning.

It is that why a LSP is first made. You can not go for series production before making a base line.


Obviously HAL will graduate from the LSP first. But high capacity production line will take years to build and ramp up. And firm orders. The more we delay the orders the later we get the high capacity production line. And fewer the fighters we produce.

The excuse that they will give further orders after the LCA attains FOC is complete BS. Do they not expect the LCA to ever attain FOC?

Let me turn it around, since IAF, MoD, HAL, and DRDO are all parts of the same family, why does HAL need to wait for FoC to invest in it?
There is nothing to turn around. As you yourself have said about the HAL.
HALs job is simple, it is to work with money given by MoD for the task they are given in time after they have signed off on it. As simple as that.

There's really no guarantee that the IAF won't do an Arjun on on HAL.
HAL invests in the program because MoD asks it to. The money is not HALs to decide on what they want to do. Neither it is IAFs money.

It is MoDs money.

And the MoD biggest failure has been its inability or unwillingness to force down a 1000 Arjuns down IA throat or a few 100 LCAs down the IAF's.

Ramu
BRFite
Posts: 140
Joined: 18 Feb 2011 17:05

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Ramu » 11 Sep 2013 01:04

Sanku wrote:Has anyone stopped to consider that the inducting the LCA in current stage (assuming magically that there are indeed planes ready to be inducted, which in itself seems questionable) -- means that there may be a high fatality rate amongst the air crew since the basic IOC clearance is not done?

Unless of course people think that IOC norms are not really required for operationalization. In which case can some one please list which parameters that LCA does not meet and how bypassing them is ok?


Operationalising it a bit early means IAF will use it with limited capabilities for now. It doesnt mean planes will start falling off the skies like a pack of mig21s. Its advantages were two-fold.

First is it helps establish a production line, LRU industry base, write a few maintenance & operating manuals etc.. I mean all the boring stuff. When the real maal is ready, everything else is pre established.

Secondly, these things are excellent foreign policy tools. Lets say 8 LCA LSP3s were produced as tranche1 a couple of years ago. We will be in a position to sell those 5-10 years old airframes to lets say nepal or another neighbour for concessional price. The influence such a fighter or a basic trainer or a 'weather radar' can never be bought from outside.

I agree that it may not help IAF's operational readiness if a war breaks out tomorrow morning. But the capability of building something on our own and the influence it can bring to the neighbourhood will surely help to postpone an impending war by tomorrow evening.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 11 Sep 2013 01:18

Sanku wrote:Has anyone stopped to consider that the inducting the LCA in current stage (assuming magically that there are indeed planes ready to be inducted, which in itself seems questionable) -- means that there may be a high fatality rate amongst the air crew since the basic IOC clearance is not done?

Sankuji,

IOC/FOC is not a magic cutoff threshold beyond which a plane suddenly becomes safe to fly. Whenever the plane is released, the envelop would be defined. As long as the pilots stay within that, there should be no problem.

Besides, it seems like they should be able to have IOC-2 by year end. SP-1 and SP-2 would be released only after that. So you have no reason to worry.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 11 Sep 2013 01:35

I find it very difficult to believe Dr. Chander (whom I respect immensely) when he says that SP-1 and SP-2 would roll off the assembly line.

If they are about to take to the air in a matter of couple of months, they must be almost ready now (Rajan sir had provided a visual confirmation of a green plane in a hanger). And for that, the structural assembly must have started about 2-3 years back (Ajai Shukla had reported this too). Clearly, the assembly lines were not set up by then.

This is from when structural assembly of SP-1 started in early 2011.
Image

I am very interested to see how they merge the planes in various stages of manufacturing into the assembly line that they are setting up now. Clearly in the first year it would be challenging to roll out 8 aircrafts. So I am very interested to see the production rate at the end of the 5th year when they are about to roll out the 40th Mk-1 plane.
Last edited by Indranil on 11 Sep 2013 03:19, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 11 Sep 2013 02:52

If it was 2000, I would be concerned about maintaining a parallel effort for IOC + FOC and production.

Also, I do NOT think they have mastered the production techniques.

However, as long as each plane (rolling out) matches a base criteria and each of them is the same as the previous one, IMHO, it should be just fine.

IOC/FOC is one thread, not to be confused with the production thread.

Large numbers will allow them to migrate from bamboo scaffolding to proper metal ones.

Even then do not expect the LCA to be picture perfect, or compare it to some Russian standards (forget any western ones - yes Western ones are superior), etc, etc, etc. All that stuff in the AMCA. Let this first child take birth.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Victor » 11 Sep 2013 03:33

Lalmohan wrote:the LCA is made by one company - but they are essentially a 'system integrator' - components of the system, come from 2000-3000 manufacturers of sub-components, parts, fastners, wire assemblies, connectors, hydraulic pipes, etc., etc., etc. All of who have to worry about their own suppliers and all of whom have to place orders on the understanding that there will be a flow of cash down this huge pyramid - and all of whom rely on the economies of scale to make any profits on what they supply

without a ready source of orders (from this programme or other industries) - who is going to invest in building up this capability?

The prototype and pre-production financial model is not like this in developed MICs and one assumes that HAL/DRDO would be no different and follow the well trodden and tested path.

From prototype to pre-production to series production to MK2, Mk3 etc is a seamless process and it is up to the user to freeze it for production. Only after a minimum performance threshold is crossed will there be justification for series production and the economics of mass production to kick in. This is true for both the integrator and the subcontractors where everyone works on prototype pricing and parts can sometime cost 1000% or more than the final production part. This is accepted practice and is all taken into account beforehand. In the case of extremely large projects like the F-35 which will be produced in the thousands, the pre-production numbers can be in the dozens, enough to form a few squadrons. Not so with LCA 1 or 2.

At this stage, citing a lack of orders as an excuse for anything is an out-and-out red herring. IAF has already reduced its threshold to get the LCA behind it quickly. The big worry now is how many LCA Mk2s will HAL be able to manufacture not how many LCA Mk 1 orders the IAF will place.

NRao wrote:Large numbers will allow them to migrate from bamboo scaffolding to proper metal ones.

:rotfl:

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 11 Sep 2013 11:41

indranilroy wrote:
Sanku wrote:Has anyone stopped to consider that the inducting the LCA in current stage (assuming magically that there are indeed planes ready to be inducted, which in itself seems questionable) -- means that there may be a high fatality rate amongst the air crew since the basic IOC clearance is not done?

Sankuji,

IOC/FOC is not a magic cutoff threshold beyond which a plane suddenly becomes safe to fly. Whenever the plane is released, the envelop would be defined. As long as the pilots stay within that, there should be no problem.

Besides, it seems like they should be able to have IOC-2 by year end. SP-1 and SP-2 would be released only after that. So you have no reason to worry.


The green beauty I saw was standing on her own beautiful legs. No assembly framework attached to it. And a screaming paintjob on the hangar said "ASSEMBLY HANGAR".

And no, let us not display derision even in jest. I have never seen bamboo scaffolding ever. Even as a kid when one of my airforce uncles used to walk me into a hangar where a DC-2 was being overhauled in the 1950's.

So no, it wasn't a production line job. And it was standing on its lonesome in all its completeness. FWIW. I drove past on Friday last but the hangar doors were closed except for enough space for someone to walk in. :(

And if anyone says it is going to fall out of the sky. My question is after >2300 flights? :eek: O ye of little faith.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sanku » 11 Sep 2013 12:00

abhik wrote:
Sanku wrote:HAL does not need financial justification. It is a DPSU fully working off MoD. It can make the necessary investments through MoD.

This "necessary investment" is an IAF order via the MoD.


There is already an IAF order through MoD for necessary investement for LSP.

But high capacity production line will take years to build and ramp up.


This is the problem, not the firm orders part. With a LSP line ready, why should HAL need years to build and ramp up? The whole idea of LSP is the ramping up the knowledge base of large scale production.

Once LSPs are made, a minimum lag time should be needed to produce firm orders


There's really no guarantee that the IAF won't do an Arjun on on HAL.


Oh please, apart from getting into another heated comparison, there is no reason to assume that all projects have same trajectory. Was Dhruv not accepted? Was Pinaka not accepted?

A program lives or dies by its merit, not because of some far fetched reasons which are nothing but aspersions on the forces.

And the MoD biggest failure has been its inability or unwillingness to force down a 1000 Arjuns down IA throat or a few 100 LCAs down the IAF's.


The above is pure circular reasoning, why should MoD force down a product which is not ready in the first place. Sure let them force down 10000000000000000 of whatever, how will that ensure that Avadi and HAL actually make more than ZERO (0) of these merely because orders are given ?

In any case if the whole approach is to force down products which are not present in the first place, I think the forces should be disbanded anyway. The DPSUs employees can be sent with lathis on the border next time there is a conflict. (Which is like every other week in Indian context)
Last edited by Sanku on 11 Sep 2013 13:22, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 11 Sep 2013 12:26

NRao wrote:The question I have is: Is the LCA so deficient that in its current form the IAF JUST cannot use it? I do not think so. I think it has some deficiencies that need to be worked on. But, it is mature enough to be start of in the IAF and as time goes along the kinks can be ironed out.


Now, I'm not exactly the brightest crayon in the pack when it comes to aviation related matters but from what I've read, it has to clear certain fundamental tests before it can be certified as ready for induction into Squadron service.That is why IOC was split into 1 and 2. IOC-1 allowed some face-saving and hand-over to IAF thing while IOC-2 is a must before it enters Squadron service. And we're not talking about anything related to weapons and such stuff here.

I don't think it has been given all OK to enter Squadron level - and regular pilot handling - service.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby mody » 11 Sep 2013 13:11

I do not understand the 20 planes as per IOC-2 standard and 20 planes as per FOC standard bit, in the IAF order.

If the FOC is to be achieved by Dec. 2014, then only about 4-5 IOC-2 standard SP planes will be ready by then, at most.
Then why would HAL continue to make IOC standard planes for almost another 18-20 months after having achieved FOC?

The order should be 40 LCA MK1. To be produced as per IOC standard, post completion of IOC-2 and then to start production as per FOC standard, once FOC has been achieved. The earlier IOC standard planes, to be upgraded to FOC standard, once FOC standard production has stabilized.
Since most structural aspects between IOC and FOC standards, are to be the same, it should not be a very task to make changes to the production line. At most 3-5 months.

Hopefully also increase the order for LCA MK1 to 60 aircrafts, from the current order of 40.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sanku » 11 Sep 2013 13:20

rajanb wrote:
indranilroy wrote:"Sanku">>Has anyone stopped to consider that the inducting the LCA in current stage (assuming magically that there are indeed planes ready to be inducted, which in itself seems questionable) -- means that there may be a high fatality rate amongst the air crew since the basic IOC clearance is not done?

Sankuji,

IOC/FOC is not a magic cutoff threshold beyond which a plane suddenly becomes safe to fly. Whenever the plane is released, the envelop would be defined. As long as the pilots stay within that, there should be no problem.

Besides, it seems like they should be able to have IOC-2 by year end. SP-1 and SP-2 would be released only after that. So you have no reason to worry.


And if anyone says it is going to fall out of the sky. My question is after >2300 flights? :eek: O ye of little faith.


rajan-ji, indranil-ji; as you well know, aviation does not work on trust, or rule of thumbs. It works of well defined SOPs created after testing, with error margins etc.

The process of IOC is indeed the process of creating the necessary SOPs which allows the plane to be used. So no IOC means the plane can not be used. There is no magic, but there is a good reason why IOC has some checks etc. Otherwise those checks could be taken out.

So far I havent heard anyone say a particular check is unneccessary in IOC, if I am wrong please correct me. Also, the worries remain the same. Will IOC complete by year end? Will post that LSPs be manufactured quickly?

On the first question, there is a greater confidence in the time line. The LSP time line unfortunately is not clear.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sanku » 11 Sep 2013 13:26

mody wrote:The order should be 40 LCA MK1. To be produced as per IOC standard, post completion of IOC-2 and then to start production as per FOC standard, once FOC has been achieved. .


The above plan assumes some things,
1) FOC will happen by such and such date
2) HAL will make LCAs by such and such date.

As for right now, making definite orders with assumptions such as above is risky. The above are moving targets.

Further from HAL perspective, they will need some time to setup a line per FOC standard from one on IOC standard. It makes sense to absorb the knowledge for FOC version a/c, plan for FOC production and only then shut down the line for changing IOC to FOC. Alternatively, a parallel FOC line can be set up when IOCs are still being manufactured. Once FOC line is ready IOC line can be converted. This gives one active line at any point of time.

Therefore there are multiple ways in which the block wise approach de-risks the production plan.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 11 Sep 2013 13:42

wake penetration sounds about the most serious testing to be completed before average and junior pilots get hold of the machine - and then there are all the weapons clearance flights to be done

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 11 Sep 2013 13:55

Just as a data-point: the IAF is on record that the 2 x Tejas Squadrons are absolutely required to be operational under 12th Plan (2012-2017) to ensure that Squadron strength does not breach the lakshman-rekha of 34 Squadrons.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 11 Sep 2013 14:26

Sankuji You have valid points.

Besides Lalchix mention of wake penetration, I personally am disappointed that we are going to stop at a parameter of +8g rather than the published design of +9g.

a) I do think that CEMILAC will not allow the release of the A/C to the IAF for squadron service if it is going to fall out of the skies. Unless the skies are going to fall upon us and we are in a situation where the IAF has to use anything they can lay their hands on. In which case, the test pilots themselves will be flying the LCA in active service.
b) By now the test pilots fly it with consummate ease and confidence. They are all ex-IAF and do certainly know what is required by the IAF for them to start the process of FOC. And the best judges of how safe it is from a pilot's viewpoint.
c) I would be, indeed, pleasantly surprised, that post the handover, the IAF let junior pilots fly SP1 and SP2. It will be veterans who would have gone through simulator training and also sat in the 3D projection room that ADA has and has had since 2006. Where what if scenarios are played out.

My reason, and I think most of us have debated the IAF's declining inventory; safety issues with the MiG21s and now the rather delayed, prolonged, painful acquisition of the Rafale, points to all stakeholders to actively push for its accelerated success.

And what about what our western and northern neighbours designs are on us?

With the current, custom built diverse versions of the LCA, the challenges are:
1) An amalgamation of all the attributes of the custom built LCAs into a standard platform. Which I think is the LSP8?
2) A production line with state of the art manufacturing capabilities. SP1 and SP2 will be the babies of a fledgling production line. Comparison with an LM, Boeing, Dassault, Sukhoi or MiG corporation's production line would be premature.
3) Contrary to what I have read here, I still believe that the IAF cannot be a reluctant bridegroom even though public utterances at times point to the contrary. Are they for reasons more than technical? I don't know.
4) The economic downturn can be looked on as an opportunity to improve our own in country capabilities and equally important: deliverables!

To sum up: MoD, ADA, HAL and the IAF are all stakeholders who share the pie of responsibility! Any failure is a collective failure on all their heads.
And it would be naïve for any one of us, including them to assume, there are no contrary pulls and pressures at play.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sanku » 11 Sep 2013 14:38

rajanb wrote:Sankuji You have valid points.
.


thank you rajan-ji; it is indeed a pleasure to be able to discuss and agree and disagree, without acrimony and name calling (of poster and services etc)

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 699
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby karan_mc » 11 Sep 2013 14:49

LCA-Tejas has completed 2309 Test Flights Successfully. (05-Sep-2013).

(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-369,LSP1-74,LSP2-282,PV5-36,LSP3-157,LSP4-94,LSP5-213,LSP7-53,NP1-4,LSP8-25)

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 11 Sep 2013 14:56

Sanku wrote:
rajanb wrote:Sankuji You have valid points.
.


thank you rajan-ji; it is indeed a pleasure to be able to discuss and agree and disagree, without acrimony and name calling (of poster and services etc)


Drop the ji please Sanku. The only two things I have on my mind is we all should have our country as paramount in our interests. Regardless of our personal likes and dislikes.

Besides BRF should be a band of brothers and sisters (am an equal opportunity guy :mrgreen: ) No need for acrimony, but use cold logic and humour to put one's point across.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby saps » 11 Sep 2013 18:03

rohitvats wrote:Just as a data-point: the IAF is on record that the 2 x Tejas Squadrons are absolutely required to be operational under 12th Plan (2012-2017) to ensure that Squadron strength does not breach the lakshman-rekha of 34 Squadrons.


Taking on from here, if we assume 60-75% flight line serviceability starting from 8 ac that would translate into roughly 4-6 ac on flight line.

Sustained operations @ of even 1-1.5 sorties / ac would translate into 5-6 sorties / day.

Assuming most task would be initially conversion followed by operational assessment in IAF on flight line; my humble opinion...We are not geared up for supporting even this kind of flying effort at sulur.

From view point of spares+support+documentation; so guess its going to be slow start even after avalanche starts with 6-8 ac till it gathers enough momentum+mass to be spectacular.

Opinions pls.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 11 Sep 2013 18:40

Hope this was not posted earlier.

Aug 5, 2013 :: India Expects Tejas Induction by Late 2013, Early 2014

Even after that the LCA will be at Sulur for some time before it is sent to the front. I would assume it would be at least 2016/17 before the LCA sees any 'front".

India’s defense minister says his country’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) program should be inducted into the Indian Air Force by the end of this year or early next year. The program is 15 years behind schedule.

After reviewing the schedule for the plane’s development, Defence Minister A.K. Antony told Parliament in an Aug. 5 letter that he has asked the Defence Research and Development Organisation and Aeronautical Development Agency to adhere to the schedule of obtaining initial operational clearance (IOC) for the plane at the end of this year, followed by final operational clearance (FOC) at the end of 2014. Induction is likely after IOC, he wrote.

An official with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), which will produce the LCA, said HAL can produce four planes per year, but added that HAL could bring that number to eight within a year after IOC clearance.

“HAL also has plans to augment the production capacity to 16 aircraft within three years after IOC clearance based on the firm orders to be received,” the HAL official said.

The Indian Air Force has already contracted 40 LCA Mark 1 aircraft, while the the requirement for Mark 2 aircraft is 83.

However, the Air Force ultimately wants 124 Mark 2 LCAs, the first of which is expected to be inducted in 2017-18.

India is also developing the naval version of the LCA, which is scheduled to be inducted in the Indian Navy in 2015.

Designed by Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Agency and state-owned HAL, the naval version will be equipped to operate from an aircraft carrier with ski-jump take-off and arrested recovery capability. The naval version has been designed with structural and landing gear modifications to the existing Air Force version to cater to larger loads and arrested recovery.

The Indian Navy has already ordered six LCA naval versions and has committed around US $30 million for each aircraft.

The LCA’s naval version is a small, lightweight, tailless, multi-role, supersonic fighter aircraft and will be deployed on India’s new indigenous aircraft carrier, which is now expected to be commissioned by 2018.


All that does sound pretty good.

????????

Would like the prod rate to be around 30 or more.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 881
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nash » 11 Sep 2013 20:49

If HAL stick to this plan, then number of LCA per year will be:
2013- IOC
2014: 4
2015: 8
2016: 8-12
2017:16

It sum upto 36-40 LCA by end of 2017.

After 2017, MkII probably comes into the picture, then it will quite interesting to speculate about the production rate.

Unless we indulge and guide private manufacturing to set up production line of LCA, 30/ year is just a dream.

But DRDO should think about this possibility because LCA has bright export prospective, whenever it is fully operational and inducted.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 11 Sep 2013 21:04

there is no point talking about production rate, when we have a big change coming up in the form of mk-2, unless between mk-1 and 2, there is no major change in jigs, assembly line and components, and the production process itself that might change between mk1 and mk2.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 11 Sep 2013 21:13

Its rather optimistic to to think that Mk2 will be ready for production by 2017. Maybe 2019? If IAf does not order more Mk1s, HALs slow-mo production rate will be enough.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 11 Sep 2013 21:44


Find it quite sad actually. The IAF wants only 164(40Mk1 + 124Mk2) LCA. Compared to the 270 MKIs that the IAF already has on order and 189 MRCAs it wants. Considering the LCA is indigenous, is the lighter and far cheaper option, you would think it would be the most numerous fighter in IAFs stable. At these numbers it will be as successful as the Marut. Fact of the matter is that we simply can't afford 3 concurrent fighter production lines(currently we have just the MKI line). For the LCA to reach its full potential the MRCA has to be cancelled, no other way around it.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 11 Sep 2013 22:03

before you feel sad, think about what missions each of these aircraft are required to perform and then how many of each might be required

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby saps » 11 Sep 2013 22:14

Lalmohan wrote:before you feel sad, think about what missions each of these aircraft are required to perform and then how many of each might be required


Now if we go by the winds of change, its only downfall. Unless something spectacular happens in next 2-3 yrs.

Mig 21's on the way out; Mig 27 with loads of issues. Really tough choice to make considering our home production would not be ready for full fledged action till at least 2016-17.

Guess that should make IAF brass sleepless...or have some decent nightmares.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 11 Sep 2013 23:49

Lalmohan wrote:before you feel sad, think about what missions each of these aircraft are required to perform and then how many of each might be required

IAF will fight with what they have. The plan of how they will fight will depend on their inventory and not the other way round. Quite simply because countries that don't design and build their own fighters don't have that luxury. Their inventory is constrained by which foreign countries are willing, what they are willing to sell what, geopolitical situation etc. IAFs current inventory is not a "zoo" because it intended it to be in this way. Point in fact, today IAF is replacing ageing Mig-21 with Su-30. Not because any new strategy dictates this, but because there is no other option. And just because IAF held an elaborate trial with many foreign fighters in the MRCA competition, lets not get fooled into believing that it has found its "Soul Mate" in the Rafale. The LCA on the other hand is designed specifically for the IAF. No reason for it to choose the Rafale over the LCA.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Sanku » 11 Sep 2013 23:55

abhik wrote: The LCA on the other hand is designed specifically for the IAF. .


That is actually questionable, based on hisotry of LCA, but we shall let it pass.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby vishvak » 12 Sep 2013 00:15

Err.. are we dis-counting probability that LCA will perform better than expected.

===
edited

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54513
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 12 Sep 2013 02:00

abhik wrote:

Find it quite sad actually. The IAF wants only 164(40Mk1 + 124Mk2) LCA. Compared to the 270 MKIs that the IAF already has on order and 189 MRCAs it wants. Considering the LCA is indigenous, is the lighter and far cheaper option, you would think it would be the most numerous fighter in IAFs stable. At these numbers it will be as successful as the Marut. Fact of the matter is that we simply can't afford 3 concurrent fighter production lines(currently we have just the MKI line). For the LCA to reach its full potential the MRCA has to be cancelled, no other way around it.



164 is enough to start a mfg line.

If the Rafale craps out then expect more.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests