LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

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.
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Shrinivasan » 15 Oct 2014 23:22

<OT> ^^^ so will the Surya Kirans (the IAF Aerobatics team which has been dismantled) now be called the "Surya Hawks" or "Sun Hawks"??? the name "Surya Tejas" suits it better... </OT>

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_20292 » 15 Oct 2014 23:33

YashG wrote:#Addendum: Ofcourse some in the forum may point that TATAs, L&Ts have already taken steps for defence production but the issue here is not intent but the intensity of intent and the ground action that comes along. At the top level all kind of business units vie for management time, conglomerate resources. Those business units that have best scope get away with most resources & management will. So large conglomerates like TATAs and L&T face the same problem. Too much of their group focus is on businesses that are about, salt, cement, cars, steel etc. How do fringe vertical businesses like TATA advanced materials in these group take a centre position? On the other hand smaller SMEs in defence supply chain may have their defence business right in the centrestage.



Good post.

We should give the startups, something like this:

http://www.sbir.gov/about/about-sttr

http://www.sbir.gov/

(why can't we be more like America ? :D This path is well trodden and China copies the Americans, wholesale. )

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_20292 » 15 Oct 2014 23:46

shalav wrote:
1. Buying an additional two squadrons of Tejas Mk. 1
2. Committing to enough Tejas Mk. 2 for 1-1 replacement for all the retiring MiG-21s
3. Commit to additional AEW&C beyond the paltry 2 nos
4. Commit to LUH in numbers
5. Commit to AMCA
6. Depute enough and more pilots to NFTC and guarantee their advancement through the ranks and not consider their posting there as a cushy one


you know, in my business, i import certain devices and i also source them from india. i.e i have several vendors and I am always developing more sources.

I find it much easier to build and buy from abroad, since they come optimized, already for the applications that I am using them for. in certain cases it is cheaper too.
manufacturing quality is better, due to the imports' huge production runs.

being patriotic costs me money, time and extra headache. should I do that, or should I not?

Bear in mind that in my case, it is not my life on the line, but my company's money, and thus it's life is certainly on the line.
Last edited by member_20292 on 16 Oct 2014 00:21, edited 1 time in total.

Shalav
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Shalav » 16 Oct 2014 00:04

mahadevbhu,

mahadevbu wrote:you know, in my business, i import certain devices and i also source them from india. i.e i have several vendors and I am always developing more sources.

I find it much easier to build and buy from abroad, since they come optimized, already for the applications that I am using them for. in certain cases it is cheaper too.
manufacturing quality is better, due to the imports' huge production runs.

being patriotic costs me money, time and extra headache. should I do that, or should I not?

Bear in mind that in my case, it is not my life on the line, but my company's money, and thus it's life is certainly on the line.

You are quoting me not merlin

I would observe that if being patriotic costs time and money which you don't want to invest - then demanding privatization is hypocrisy.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Shreeman » 16 Oct 2014 01:06

mahadevbhu wrote:
YashG wrote:#Addendum: Ofcourse some in the forum may point that TATAs, L&Ts have already taken steps for defence production but the issue here is not intent but the intensity of intent and the ground action that comes along. At the top level all kind of business units vie for management time, conglomerate resources. Those business units that have best scope get away with most resources & management will. So large conglomerates like TATAs and L&T face the same problem. Too much of their group focus is on businesses that are about, salt, cement, cars, steel etc. How do fringe vertical businesses like TATA advanced materials in these group take a centre position? On the other hand smaller SMEs in defence supply chain may have their defence business right in the centrestage.



Good post.

We should give the startups, something like this:

http://www.sbir.gov/about/about-sttr

http://www.sbir.gov/

(why can't we be more like America ? :D This path is well trodden and China copies the Americans, wholesale. )


There are literally an infinite number of ways to incentivise private small enterprise. This is NOT a good one.

In fact, it is the worst one. Small amounts of upfront capital injection does not work in the US, and will not work at all in India. It is at least a 2 year cycle for any ereasonable evaluation. Oversight is impossible. Misuse is omnipresent. Quality is nonexistent.

Bribing individuals or small number of poeople will not create an industrial complex.

1.5 old paise.

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_20292 » 16 Oct 2014 01:06

Shalav wrote:I would observe that if being patriotic costs time and money which you don't want to invest - then demanding privatization is hypocrisy.


But the notion of supporting my countrymen's businesses is awesome! I'm a patriot behind my computer screen keyboard!

as long as it's

1. not on my $ and my time and life.

If one were to support IAF's efforts towards indigenization, then one should start with oneself - i.e buy a Tata Indica over a Toyota Etios and so on. Buy swadeshi , or at least try to.

It is not the IAF's job to support indigenization - they are being self focused like you and me.

It is the government of India's job and the MoD's, to force it to accept Indian products and bear responsibility for all that results.

From my own personal experience, I can fully sympathize with the IAF as a customer.

Disclaimer: My own project(HAL/ADA) would not exist without a lot of customer support (IAF).
My customer is supporting me because I can get the job done cheaply and well and I have technical competence for the same. He can also accept a cut price product, which is not mission critical to him.
And I'm closely integrated with him.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Cosmo_R » 16 Oct 2014 02:14

Only the big guys can get bank guarantees and have access to funding. The smaller guys still get to be subcontractors and build up capability over time.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Cosmo_R » 16 Oct 2014 02:18

@ mahadevbhu. In general, I agree. The IAF does not even get to select the type of a/c—only to specify its requirements. As far as it is concerned, it is tasked with certain duties and requires certain tools to do the job. That job is on short notice so it wants everything needed here and now and is not focused on a 10 year strategic move build up local firms. That is the job of MoD and its strategic thinkers if they exist.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4436
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby srai » 16 Oct 2014 20:59

What to expect on LCA spin tests...

F-16 Loss of Control, Test Pilot on Yaw Departure


F-35C High Angle of Attack (Test Explained)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8063
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Indranil » 16 Oct 2014 23:23

Thank you for sharing those videos.
However for LCA, they are not going to have the pilot induced OOCF (our-of-control flight). They will stick to prevention rather than recovery.
AN APPROACH TO HIGH AoA TESTING OF THE TEJAS LCA
Overall Test Philosophy.
Modern fighter aircraft are designed to be flown near their maximum performance limits to capitalize on advantages over other aircraft.This can result in departures from controlled flight. A pilot rarely enters out-of-control flight intentionally. When it does occur, it’s usually in a dynamic and disorienting manner. Due to the normally forgiving handling qualities of the Tejas and its contemporary aircraft, OOCF incidents are quite surprising to the pilot and challenging,violent and unexpected motions can be encountered. This testing must therefore be extremely thorough so that hidden traps are not passed on to the user where costs are likely to be high. However, a full investigation of HAoA characteristics of a high performance ac including spinning is a very high risk, high cost and time consuming proposition. Considering the large number of external stores configurations and the need to clear a two seater version, the test campaign could well take a few years of work up, flight test, analysis, re design and certification. Given the Tejas’ flat, fast and oscillatory nature of predicted spin modes, the sharp cliffs in critical stability derivatives and the internationally evolving philosophy of testing departure prevention rather than post departure behaviour, it was decided that the ac would not be intentionally spun.Departure prevention, rather than spin recovery, will form the basis of test philosophy with full preparation for an OOCF event and its recovery. In this regard it may be recalled that in the recent CFH test campaign of the BAe Typhoon II ac not a single departure was encountered and the spin chute was never used, although the ac was subjected to every combination of OOCF causing events. Further, although several spin recovery techniques have been identified in the vertical tunnel experiments, no recourse to a “piloted” recovery will be made and the spin chute will be used immediately on departure to protect hydraulics and provide fastest possible recovery.


They know how to recover the aircraft using just the controls. But, that was predicted to be risky and avoided by going for the spin-chute if departure happens.
Clearly, the spin recovery technique is an involved procedure requiring good orientation(knowledge of spin direction) and timing of controls. This is not a satisfactory situation considering the very high rates of rotation and build up of longitudinal acceleration at the pilot’s location. During several similar programmes abroad it was decided that the max negative longitudinal (nx) acceleration permissible at the pilot’s location is –4g. Beyond this value the pilot would not be able to assume the correct posture to eject. As estimated from the vertical tunnel tests, the spin axis would pass through a point between the pilot and the ac cg. This point would move backwards and finally pass through the cg. Thus the ‘eye balls out’ acceleration felt by the pilot would continue to increase. Considering all the above, no attempt to recover the ac through use of controls would be made and spin chute would be deployed immediately the CAS drops under chute operating limits.

What is interesting is that LCA has been cleared for 26 degree AoA (the maximum that they wanted to achieve) without any aircraft being fitted with a spin-chute (or did I miss it)! So did LCA show better authority than predicted?

In the JSF, the recovery seems to be left to the flight computer. This is very interesting and ideal (IMHO) because the computer is not prone to the limits of the human body. However, it requires excellent sensors and algorithms which can identify when the plane has departed and when not. If they have perfected this, they deserve credit. In case of LCA, CLAW will momentarily relinquish control to the pilot to recover the plane.
Peculiarities Of A Fly-By-Wire Configuration And Impact Of Full Authority Flight Control System.
As opposed to conventionally controlled ac, in the case of a full authority closed loop control ac such as the LCA, departure will cause the controls to oppose the ac motion. Since little response will be seen to these inputs, the controls will hard over at up to max actuator rate. Thus oscillatory post departure/spin characteristics will cause full deflection, max rate, and oscillatory deflections of control surfaces, which will result in large hydraulic system demands. If the engine flames out,the emergency hydraulic pump will not be able to cope with this demand and will stall or cavitate. Therefore the emergency hydraulic system must be capable of supporting these control system actuator demands. Further, the control system will apply out spin roll controls, which in the case of the Tejas, post stall AoA, will be pro spin. Therefore to be able to achieve quick and full recovery it is desirable to provide the pilot with full and direct control surface authority. LCA being a highly augmented aircraft, under normal flying conditions, the control laws significantly reduce the pilot’s command authority over the control surfaces. Therefore, in the post stall flight regime the control laws should be inhibited from reducing the pilot authority over the control laws and this is achieved by incorporating an additional pilot selectable spin recovery mode in the control laws which disconnects the feedbacks from the inertial sensors and scales the pilot stick input to give full authority over the control surfaces. However, as the Tejas is unstable and unflyable without the CLAW, the ac will have to be stabilized by a spin parachute before the pilot takes over manually.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 17 Oct 2014 00:21

Indranil, but standard articles wont have a spin chute, whats the plan for those..my understanding is the 26 deg AOA and envelope expansion includes the spin recovery trials and the FBW will prevent the aircraft from getting into a spin situation.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 17 Oct 2014 01:31

quite a feat and quite a bit of risky business with ton of variables.
- CLAW disconnecting feedbacks - ðf
- scaling the stick - ðs
- unstablity - Δu
- unflyability - ΔF
- spin chute correction - Δc

with each of them having their own time, to finally get to the manual controls - but CLAW needs to kick back in ASAP because Δu + ΔF goes against manual controls.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8063
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Indranil » 17 Oct 2014 01:54

Karan M wrote:Indranil, but standard articles wont have a spin chute, whats the plan for those..my understanding is the 26 deg AOA and envelope expansion includes the spin recovery trials and the FBW will prevent the aircraft from getting into a spin situation.

Yeah the chutes only during high AoA testing, just in case the aircraft departed before predicted values. But, I never saw a spin chute attached to any of the LSPs. Begs the question on what gave them that confidence. We all know ADA will not have risked it unless they were quite sanguine.

In the SPs, they would know that the aircraft will not depart till 26 degrees and the FBW wpn't allow anything above that AoA. The probability that CLAW allows the aircraft to reach OOCF is 10^-7.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7414
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby nachiket » 17 Oct 2014 02:24

26 degrees was the design limit. Is it confirmed that they have actually cleared the SP's for 26 deg maximum AoA? I find that hard to believe, since LSP 6 was supposed to fly for that to happen. It never did.

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, 22-Oct-2013

Postby vina » 17 Oct 2014 05:38

Well, Delta wings have an inherently higher AoA capability than the normal wings. The critical angle I would assume is in the low 30s. What they would be more concerned about is the yaw and roll stability at those angles of attack and would have satisfied themselves of enough stability reserve to go for it (possibly as a result of extensive wind tunnel testing?)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8063
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Indranil » 17 Oct 2014 06:01

nachiket wrote:26 degrees was the design limit. Is it confirmed that they have actually cleared the SP's for 26 deg maximum AoA? I find that hard to believe, since LSP 6 was supposed to fly for that to happen. It never did.

Nothing official. Tarmak and Jha reported it. Also, there will be no more LSP6.
vina wrote:Well, Delta wings have an inherently higher AoA capability than the normal wings. The critical angle I would assume is in the low 30s. What they would be more concerned about is the yaw and roll stability at those angles of attack and would have satisfied themselves of enough stability reserve to go for it (possibly as a result of extensive wind tunnel testing?)

You are right. The critical angle is beyond 35 (according to wind tunnel). Cn-beta plummeted at 25, but they had sufficient rudder authority till 30. So they provide directional stability through rudder inputs till 26 (which they set as the AoA limit).
I also have the feeling that LSPs behaved better than predicted.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Cosmo_R » 17 Oct 2014 06:11

@Shalav ^^" Why would someone working in the Public Sector, leave for a Private sector job?"

When the public sector job is not going to be there.

HAL has been into the screwdriver (also imported) business. They have not made any LCA MK 2s yet or any Mk1s in quantity. What disadvantage is there to transferring 'ToT' to Indian private players?

Oh!, BTW, if 'ToT' is so difficult among Indian players, what does 'ToT' mean WRT to Rafale and MMRCA to HAL?.

They have better manuals, screwdrivers, communications skills, "R&D"?

If we are leery of letting private players in on MK2 (with GE engine, US actuators and what not), we should be even more leery of HAL building the MMRCA.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby RoyG » 17 Oct 2014 07:55

[Edited by mod]
Last edited by Raja Bose on 17 Oct 2014 10:58, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: User warned for language.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby RKumar » 17 Oct 2014 13:19

Does anyone know where is the SP1 with HAL/IAF?

As its first flight is not counted by the ADA

2748th flight on 16 Oct

TD1 : 233 TD2 : 305
PV1: 242 PV2: 222 PV3: 387 PV5: 64
LSP1: 74 LSP2: 294 LSP3: 231 LSP4: 152 LSP5: 278 LSP7: 130 LSP8 : 111
NP1: 25


And what is the status of the NP-2? It was supposed to be in the air around 15th October. Can we expect it is as a Diwali gift? :mrgreen:

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2932
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby tsarkar » 17 Oct 2014 17:24

Hobbes wrote:Interesting article from AVM Arjun Subramaniam, who is a current service officer with the IAF. The article is at http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns ... 876105.ece. I reproduce the text below (emphases all mine):
Undermining national security Arjun Subramaniam is a serving Air Vice Marshal in the IAF and an air power analyst.

Bharat Karnad is a self declared analyst like Prasun without an iota of knowledge, intelligence or even basic common sense making idiotic posts.

His post on Arihant was a classic blooper. Reproduced here to highlight his intelligence
tsarkar wrote:http://bharatkarnad.com/2014/08/21/arihant-has-dived-below-crushing-depths/
The most obvious thing that has not been commented on is the humpback on the hull — the so-called “one and a half hulls””– that permits the boat to slice through water, performing diving and other actions more efficiently. It is a design aspect, along with several other design features, taken from the Russian Severodvinsk and Borei class nuclear subs.
Mr. Karnad is horribly mistaken in -
1. His flawed understanding of “one and a half hulls”
2. Equating the hump to “one and a half hulls”
3. Incorrectly stating the benefits of the hump as "permits the boat to slice through water, performing diving and other actions more efficiently"

The correct explanation of double hull, single hull & "one and a half hulls" as well as benefits of each is accurately described here http://rbth.com/defence/2014/06/17/russ ... 37483.html
It was decided that Yasen-class submarines would not make use of the double-hull structure that all Soviet submarines had at the time. However, neither did it become a single-hull submarine, like its U.S. equivalents. Two hulls ensure a submarine's reliability and buoyancy, while a single hull means noiselessness and invisibility. Yasen became something in between, having the so-called "one and a half hull" architecture, with a light hull covering only part of the submarine's pressure hull. Another traditional feature of Soviet submarine design that was not implemented in the Yasen-class submarine was the location of its torpedo tubes in the bow. That was where the submarine's powerful sonar system Irtysh was based, so there was simply no space left for torpedoes. Consequently, the torpedo tubes were placed in the middle section of the submarine at an angle to the centreline, borrowing a construction solution widely used in the U.S.


The "performing diving and other actions more efficiently" statement is hilarious, because diving is a function of ballast tanks and hydroplanes and tailplanes. Not hull type.

The Arihant may benefit from a revolver-like contraption firing ballistic and cruise missiles; so the SSBN may carry more than just 4 K-4s/K-15s.
Revolver mechanisms require horizontal space beside the firing mechanism to store the rest of the revolver mechanism and reloads as shown here http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... ighted.jpg

Unfortunately Arihant has no such horizontal width to store revolver mechanism or reloads.

Our strategic analyst is writing things without any scientific or engineering basis.

Hobbes
BRFite
Posts: 219
Joined: 14 Mar 2011 02:59

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Hobbes » 18 Oct 2014 07:23

^^^^
The primary difference being that Prasun is a plagiarist and liar, while Karnad, though lacking in technical skills, is an excellent political defence analyst. All in all, while I might take his engineering analyses with a grain of salt, I do respect his other work.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2226
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Vivek K » 18 Oct 2014 07:36

India is very poorly served by people like Pasun Sengupta and some other notables on this forum. The LCA is a capable fighter. The IAF needs to buy 200 MK1 so that we may understand everything about the plane and its deficiencies that could be improved and learnt from. By punting to the MK2, the IAF is harming national security and the country's future.

Lies are told about foreign equipment where we do not have even the tech to make our tyres for years and useless logic is used to keep out potent machines like the LCA. I hope one day some one wakes up and holds the current crop of decision makers accountable.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2226
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Vivek K » 18 Oct 2014 09:04

Asking for multi role is a ruse to keep the LCA out. How multirole was the Mig-21? The LCA is far more multi role capable than the mig-21 - which the IAF still flies calling them bisons today. That is like a glorified Amby vs the latest from Honda. Quadruplex FBW, digital FADEC, capable of 1000s of pounds of stores in excess of the Mig-21 and perhaps even the Jag. Yet it is not good enough!

Pledging the country's wealth away for generations is not a threat to national security? Mortgaging the future of generations for vested corrupt motivations is not a crime?

subhamoy.das
BRFite
Posts: 1027
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby subhamoy.das » 18 Oct 2014 09:38

It is a good decision to have private industries take over LCA and make incremental improvements while PSU focuses on building some thing from ground up. This is typically the model in software outsourcing also. The risks of not able to make incremental upgrades in a existing product is far less than the risk in trying to develop a complete new platform. Also the private industry can bring in scale of production which PSU cannot bring..

pushkar.bhat
BRFite
Posts: 293
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby pushkar.bhat » 18 Oct 2014 10:02

subhamoy.das wrote:It is a good decision to have private industries take over LCA and make incremental improvements while PSU focuses on building some thing from ground up. This is typically the model in software outsourcing also. The risks of not able to make incremental upgrades in a existing product is far less than the risk in trying to develop a complete new platform. Also the private industry can bring in scale of production which PSU cannot bring..


Can all the proponents of the above model please share how the PSU will get returns on their investments. The money invested in that PSU is our money as tax payers. What is being proposed if the worst example of crony capitalism. PSU to invest and then handover to pvt sector so that some lala makes money and creates a Rs 450 Cr home. Secondly if the private sector wants to reap the benefits are they also ready to start creating facilities for development of projects.

Most of the capital outlays to date have been in capacity building the private sector who is clamoring for a share of the action now was nowhere to be seen when it was a high risk project. If the likes of reliance or for that matter Tata and L&T want to setup a assembly line then let them first start by putting 50000 Cr on the table for a research institute on defence technology development. They can then each pay 10000 Cr for the next 10 years and whatever comes out if accepted by the defense forces could be produced by them.

High risks high rewards is the name of the game in defense production and that is precisely why it is not a easy game. If the above model is not acceptable then they should reconcile themselves to being vendors to the prime SI i.e. HAL, BEL et al. And for all of the proponents of handing over the LCA line to private players please answer the able questions so that we can have a meaningful debate.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5717
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby vishvak » 18 Oct 2014 10:21

A few possibilities:
(1) Patents remain with state companies while private companies produce export version, thereby add to logistics for mk-1.
(2) Innovation in terms of by products and better-than-import products goals. PSUs get % of sales profits.
(3) Supply management for global outreach and explorations.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3635
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Neela » 18 Oct 2014 11:03

Mk.1 is still a good candidate for export. Thats an angle HAL can pursue to quickly see RoI.

member_28788
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_28788 » 18 Oct 2014 13:57

vishvak wrote:A few possibilities:
(1) Patents remain with state companies while private companies produce export version, thereby add to logistics for mk-1.
.


Patenting means full disclosure of information about technology. Patent by rules means that filing authority will provide enough documentations for someone with fair domain expertise will be able to reproduce it using documentations. That obviously never happens in critical defence tech. Countries go to lengths for stealing tech. I think "retaining patents" cannot be a ground for any argument where defense technologies are involved.
Last edited by member_28788 on 18 Oct 2014 19:40, edited 1 time in total.

subhamoy.das
BRFite
Posts: 1027
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby subhamoy.das » 18 Oct 2014 17:01

All PSU should be sold off. Govt should focus on governance and not manufacturing. PSU have no incentive to perform as they are burning pubic money and hence not accountable and end up wasting public money resulting in long delays and poor product. Compare PSU companies in the same sector with their private counter part and u will see the difference. Initially the PSU should only have R&D activity and once the line is crossed, then manufacturing should be handed over to private companies. I am happy to see that my tax money is being used to get the biggest bang for it and that is to develop the IP. After the private companies mature then all the govt need to do is do a RFP an select a few private vendors and monitor the program. This is the US model and it works like a charm. I feel India is also moving in this direction with the "make in india" model.

pushkar.bhat
BRFite
Posts: 293
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby pushkar.bhat » 18 Oct 2014 17:34

subhamoy.das wrote:All PSU should be sold off. Govt should focus on governance and not manufacturing. PSU have no incentive to perform as they are burning pubic money and hence not accountable and end up wasting public money resulting in long delays and poor product. Compare PSU companies in the same sector with their private counter part and u will see the difference. Initially the PSU should only have R&D activity and once the line is crossed, then manufacturing should be handed over to private companies. I am happy to see that my tax money is being used to get the biggest bang for it and that is to develop the IP. After the private companies mature then all the govt need to do is do a RFP an select a few private vendors and monitor the program. This is the US model and it works like a charm. I feel India is also moving in this direction with the "make in india" model.


I presume you are a resident of Khan Country. :lol: I wish you the very best with your wishes for burning tax payer money on R&D.

However, what confuses me is that you are willing to allow inefficient PSU's to do all the R&D. Don't you think they will be all inefficient and waste your money and worst delay stuff and even worst fail after that. :roll: :shock: :lol: How can you be self contradictory within the same paragraph. :lol: Better idea will be for private sector to put their money and be super duper efficient.

On PSU's be inefficient vis-a-vis private sector all i will say is that the coal scam reports will soon demonstrate why PSU's which followed norms had higher costs vis-a-vis their private counter parts. and yes if you prefer it can be similary demonstrated even with the 2G++ scam aka BSNL & MTNL mismanagement issue. That can be another fun discussion to have but that will be OT on this thread. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

That will be the last on this topic from me.

member_28788
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_28788 » 18 Oct 2014 19:54

pushkar.bhat wrote:
subhamoy.das wrote:All PSU should be sold off. Govt should focus on governance and not manufacturing. PSU have no incentive to perform as they are burning pubic money and hence not accountable and end up wasting public money resulting in long delays and poor product. Compare PSU companies in the same sector with their private counter part and u will see the difference. Initially the PSU should only have R&D activity and once the line is crossed, then manufacturing should be handed over to private companies. I am happy to see that my tax money is being used to get the biggest bang for it and that is to develop the IP. After the private companies mature then all the govt need to do is do a RFP an select a few private vendors and monitor the program. This is the US model and it works like a charm. I feel India is also moving in this direction with the "make in india" model.


I presume you are a resident of Khan Country. :lol: I wish you the very best with your wishes for burning tax payer money on R&D.

However, what confuses me is that you are willing to allow inefficient PSU's to do all the R&D. Don't you think they will be all inefficient and waste your money and worst delay stuff and even worst fail after that. :roll: :shock: :lol: How can you be self contradictory within the same paragraph. :lol: Better idea will be for private sector to put their money and be super duper efficient.

On PSU's be inefficient vis-a-vis private sector all i will say is that the coal scam reports will soon demonstrate why PSU's which followed norms had higher costs vis-a-vis their private counter parts. and yes if you prefer it can be similary demonstrated even with the 2G++ scam aka BSNL & MTNL mismanagement issue. That can be another fun discussion to have but that will be OT on this thread. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

That will be the last on this topic from me.


Here are my two cents. Private companies are efficient but they want to be efficient at making money(#1). That in being so they are/may also be efficient at delivering result(#2) is only a side-result. If given a way to be super efficient at #1 at the expense of #2 they will not dither, thats their color. Corruption is when #1 overtakes #2. The caveat of involving the private sector is how do you ensure the second even as the private companies run after the first.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby RoyG » 18 Oct 2014 21:32

Eventually most defense production and R&D will be in private hands. Just like clothing, cell phones, computers, etc. The gov just cannot compete past a certain point. We are heading in that direction especially with the lift in the FDI cap and allowing domestic players a bigger share of the production workload. Corruption exists in both the private and public sector. You have to ensure that the guidelines are clear, you have an efficient court system, and investigative capabilities. Work on that instead of penalizing those who want to participate in defense industry.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 18 Oct 2014 21:45

Can you guys take this PSU vs Pvt disvussion, which has been discussed a zillion times to the OT thread and leave this one focused to news and details about the LCA.
TIA

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_28108 » 18 Oct 2014 21:50

Some one had asked me regarding the recruiting firm for ADA for temp work - It is Sheeba computers

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4436
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby srai » 21 Oct 2014 11:23

Image

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4436
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby srai » 21 Oct 2014 19:59

ADA - LCA Flight Test News

That page has monthly updates since May 2010.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1777
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Zynda » 23 Oct 2014 02:15

prasannasimha wrote:Some one had asked me regarding the recruiting firm for ADA for temp work - It is Sheeba computers


Thx a lot for the info Sir. Will pass on the same to interested candidates.

Ranjani Brow

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Ranjani Brow » 24 Oct 2014 12:39

Image

I think 70-80Km is the tracking range. Good enough for Derby and Astra.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8063
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Indranil » 24 Oct 2014 18:32


venkat_r
BRFite
Posts: 334
Joined: 20 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby venkat_r » 24 Oct 2014 18:55

Breathtaking pictures!! Just cannot get enough of this bird.

Thanks for posting.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests