LCA Tejas: 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.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gyan » 12 Oct 2015 00:15

Nobody has said that IOC-1 is adequate in itself. It is only being stated that the programme had progressed enough and de-risked at IOC stage for additional orders to be placed. Any minor changes could have been incorporated, during or after production, as aircraft takes around 4 years to roll out after order is placed. Any orders, if at all placed today, big if, will see additional LCA rolling out only in 2020 (assuming one year to place orders for components). But having said that, gross incompetence & lethargy of HAL is also unforgivable. They have not only delayed LCA production but also Rustom, Saras, LUH, LCH, HTT-40, IJT, MRH.... Where has HAL done a good or even reasonable job?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2015 01:31

I have been thinking, assuming R&D establishment had gone along with IAF's mig21 replacement fighter concept, what was the realistic time frame when it would have been inducted in large numbers in IAF??

Opinions of more learned fellows are welcome.

Here is my take:
Given ASR were released in 1985 and real funding only started in 1993 (Even if it has been sanctioned earlier, its fair to assume that they would not have got any money through those lean years, stalling the project), I don't think the actual planned ASR intention of inducting "220 planes by 1994" (in CAG words from their report - though i think they mixed up between starting the induction by 1994 of 220 a/c with inducting 220 a/c by 1994 - we can give them benefit of doubt here - but even then I think, to design and develop and start serial production in mere 9 years for even a 3rd gen fighter was too ambitious. Was the 1994 date specified by IAF or promised by ADA/HAL, I don't know. But both sides agreed on it at least it seems).

Lets see Saab-37 Viggen time line from wiki:
1952-57 - Concept floated
1962 - final proposal accepted
1964 - construction started
1967 - 1st prototype flight
1971 - Induction in AF with 'Strike' version
1978 - induction of Fighter version

Wiki page also notes that due to access to US technology, it was developed much faster and much cheaper. So 9 years (1962 - 1971) of design and development with all help from US for an OEM who was in continuous fighter development without gap..!! Do you guys think it was something that ADA/HAL could have pulled off even in ideal case, even for 3rd Gen fighter ?? (I am counting 1985 as real start of project since ADA was created only in 1984 and it would have taken some time just to take first steps, and also because without IAF ASR it was not much meaningful work anyway)

With 1991 economic troubles and 1998 sanctions, I think, the earliest we could have seen induction of that hypothetical 3rd gen fighter is not before 2000. And FOC perhaps around 2005ish (assuming IAF inducting it at IOC happily since they would've had what they wanted).

But this is assuming the 3rd gen junk (with conventional aerodynamic config, no digital FBW FCS (and thus lesser manoeuvrability), all metal body, some off the shelf available RADAR, no glass cockpit etc) would have met the IAF ASR. And not counting the changes IAF put forth 2005 onwards for weapon systems and avionics. So we would have had a plane in 2005 which would be worse than even JF-17 - with basic A2A + basic A2G ((without BVR, PGMs, HMDS etc since IAF only specified these after 2005)) capacity. Its anyone's guess how many legged chitah it would have been called by all, since it would be hopelessly outdated even at its FOC. There would be no next iteration of this, since anything more would have demanded an digital FCS on it, latest avionics and what not - essentially new aircraft altogether, which would have taken 2020 at least - for LCA MK2 type capability.

May be above was doable. May be we would have been better off with above, with all MMRCA drama cancelled (or may be not. Considering the above plane would never be capable of true multirole, MMRCA would have happened anyway. or Next fighter would have been targeted as MMRCA who knows).

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3863
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cain Marko » 12 Oct 2015 01:52

@ Gyan, chanakya is saying exactly what Rohit wrote about...and others too have been saying similar stuff. More lca orders needed...some say at ioc I std., others at 2, and still others at an even earlier config.

If it was easy enough to bring ioc 1 std. LCA to foc std, why did hal not ready it's production lines, by now it would have the capability to build 16 p.a. An order of 40 is not small by any means and has been pending for ages. And another for 99 more was also on the cards since 2009.

Second, what could the iaf have done with aircraft to be purchased at ioc 1 std., that had not yet completed the entire flight program? What if loss of life had occurred because of non completion of wake penetration tests? What kind of operational tactics could be evolved with a limited flight envelope? Jarnails on the forum suggest they should have ordered more.

Actually, what the chief said is just stating the obvious, we have known it all along...whats more, one can expect a much larger number than the 126 presently being talked of as the lca matures, I'm willing to bet on it.
Last edited by Cain Marko on 12 Oct 2015 02:51, edited 1 time in total.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3863
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cain Marko » 12 Oct 2015 02:14

chaanakya wrote:@cain marko

IOC 1 happened in 2011. By that time LCA was ahead of current MIG 21.

IAF should have the policy statement upfront, not the assumed one, that if LCA passes the test they would procure specified numbers minimum.
It can not be 20 or 40 as that would be ridiculously low for setting up production units. Committing 120+ is good even though it should have been done four years earlier. That gives enough lead time to interested partied to set up units for supply chain for parts. And each part would have its own lead time which needs to be factored into to decide rate of production.

I have no doubt that LCA was conceived as replacement for MIG 21 but IAF went looking elsewhere as well. Their ASR would in 1980s would have little resemblance to what is being asked now as those techs weren't available at that time. LCA survived because scientists dared to think into future else it would have been rejected as dated.

Promises should be as in a business deal. Written down handed sealed and delivered. If you read the tkstales account they made it as a National project rather than IAF project. That speaks volumes of the mindset prevailing in forces. Why this idea of National project as different from IAF project?

Heli vs LCA template is because of complexities involved. One can as well argue that template for production of screwdriver and Power wrench are same.


I think Rohit has done more than enough too answer your questions. As far as the past goes and why the project was a national one and not purely iaf led, some may argue that this could have been done for political reasons; God knows the babus and ministers are insecure about the services and this was just another way of clipping the AF's wings..it is a huge speculation on your part that the iaf was left out simply because it was anti desi products. Couldn't be further from the truth..a major push for the lca came from ACM Idris Latif despite the misgivings of his juniors...
Last edited by Cain Marko on 12 Oct 2015 02:52, edited 1 time in total.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3863
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cain Marko » 12 Oct 2015 02:27

nileshjr wrote:I have been thinking, snip.


Huge assumptions here....But the other side of the coin...

What if IAF had done a study as suggested in tks blog, and come up with similar design as even a jf 17. Around 2000, this would have been very acceptable, possibly even preventing this entire mrca circus, can you imagine the money and headache saved? Who knows - instead of a 3 legged cheetah, we might have had a fleet of 4 legged ghodas. At least we might have skipped the present security nightmare.

Another thing to note is that legacy birds have been upgraded to newer levels including fcs, fly by wire, hotas, glass cockpit et al..
Last edited by Cain Marko on 12 Oct 2015 03:58, edited 1 time in total.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 12 Oct 2015 05:29

The discussions here tend to reflect the IAF institutional thinking (non-engineering/scientific background or haven't worked with engineers too much) with those of DRDO/HAL (engineering/scientific background or worked with engineers extensively). The two sides have hard time conveying their messages (as common knowledge/sense) and can't figure out why the other side doesn't understand. The arguments tend to go in circles ... expectations are different and parallel thoughts so to speak ;)

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36394
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 12 Oct 2015 06:15

Doesn't AESA need more auxiliary power? I am assuming we might jump to the more efficient and powerful AlGaN t/rs having to prolong schedules to match maturing technologies. If we are to use the reduced config Elta GaAs walas, then we may not get to engage the iDerby-ER 120km BVRs for track & locks [assumptions].. as we are already restricted by the size of the nose cone and the radome issues. This one area we need to think hard on the power packs, and get them not focus on 'light weight', but on the performance. we can change the tags and versions to whatever IAF wants.

Some gray areas here.

a nice raytheon ref
http://www.raytheon.com/news/technology ... 014_i1.pdf

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 12 Oct 2015 07:17

Makes the claim LCA Mk1A will be based off of NP1/NLCA? Interesting..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/in ... wings.html

THE BIGGER PICTURE: Make in India gets new wings

By Manoj Joshi 01:50 12 Oct 2015, updated 01:50 12 Oct 2015

The government’s decision to insist that the Indian Air Force induct a large number of Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) fighters is the kind of shock treatment that was needed to push the ‘Make in India’ project.

A news report says that the government has rejected the IAF’s demand for 44 more Rafale aircraft, in addition to the deal for 36 announced by the government earlier this year.

Instead, the IAF has been told that the kind of numbers it wanted could only be met by inducting the LCA.
The Indian Air Force will now induct 120 home-grown Tejas light fighter jets instead of the 40 planned earlier


The IAF has itself to blame for its predicament. The medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) was originally intended to be a stop-gap measure to enable the LCA project to be completed. However, the IAF rigged the competition by including the heavier, more` capable two-engine fighters and knocking out the best option, the Swedish Gripen.

As a result, a competition for a $8 billion stop-gap fighter morphed into a huge buy involving 126 Rafales which would have cost the nation anywhere between $25-30 billion.

Requirements

Critics cite a C&AG report of May 2015 claiming that the aircraft had 53 shortcomings in respect of the IAF’s requirements such as an integral self-protection jammer and a radar warning receiver. They also noted that the aircraft weighed more than it should and had a lower internal fuel capacity.

But K Tamilmani, the DRDO’s aerospace chief, has, more recently, said that the modified version of the LCA addressed most of the air force’s concerns relating to electronic warfare systems, flight computer, radar and maintenance problems.

In pushing the LCA in the IAF’s face, the government has dealt with one of the two big problems faced by the project - the IAF's refusal to take ownership of the LCA.

In contrast, the Indian Navy has ‘owned’ the LCA-Navy project and has worked with the DRDO to tweak the aircraft to meet its requirements.

Some of these modifications — a stronger undercarriage and Levcons to provide it greater agility — will figure in the aircraft that will now be made for the IAF. It needs to be noted that the LCA, which will be used for close air support or countercounter air missions, will not need the kind of sophisticated electronics that an aircraft designed to operate deep in enemy territory needs.

Third party assessments are that the LCA is a capable fighter, better than its counterparts like the Sino-Pak JF-17. Its use of composites which cover 90 per cent of its surface provides it natural stealth. Its design makes it highly stable and easy to fly, a fact attested to by Ruag specialists who wanted to market a tandem-seat version as a lead-in fighter trainer (LIFT).


Manufacturing

But the government still needs to deal with the second big problem - getting the state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to deal with the project with the seriousness it deserves.

As the C&AG report noted, the manufacturing facilities at HAL currently cater to the production of only four aircraft per year, as against the eight needed, because of delays in procuring plant and machinery, tools and the construction of production hangars.

Likewise, repair and overhaul (ROH) facility for LCA, as specified in the ASR, has not been fully created. HAL, which makes a great deal of money through licence-producing aircraft like the Su- 30MKI, for which it charges the government Rs 100 crore more than the cost for an off-the-shelf item from Russia, couldn’t be bothered with the need to encourage an Indian project.

Indeed, some years back, the Swiss-German giant Ruag wrote to HAL offering its expertise in setting up assembly lines to manufacture the LCA and offering an industrial partnership to sell the aircraft abroad. But HAL did not even have the courtesy to reply.


This would be a good time for the government to look into the IAF’s claim that it needs at least 45 squadrons to take on the ‘two-front collusive threat’ from Pakistan and China. As of now, says the IAF, it only has 35 active fighter squadrons, and even this could go down to 32.

There are two issues here - the nature of war of the future. Given the fact that India, Pakistan and China are nuclear-armed states, the chances of any kind of an all-out war are low. At worst, we may see localised clashes such as the Kargil mini-war.

Capabilities

But this is not something which the IAF can decide, it requires the government to make an overall strategy assessment and then pinning down the kind of capabilities India’s armed forces need.

This will enable a planned acquisition of capabilities, instead of the present chaos which has led to the fiasco of the Rafale buy and the decision to halve the size of the mountain strike corps.


The writer is a Contributing Editor Mail Today and Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18677
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 12 Oct 2015 07:25

Some bloopers - eg combat radius of Tejas is upto 500km, ..and anonymous sources galore, wrong number of "issues"as flagged by CAG, so mistakes here and there but some interesting details... but claims Mk1A plan already signed on Sep 23, NLCA Mk2 will continue (something tells me IAF will wake up fine day and ask for that too)..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/in ... ed-40.html

AF gets 120 home-built jets instead of the planned 40

By Gautam Datt

Published: 22:40 GMT, 10 October 2015 | Updated: 22:40 GMT, 10 October 2015

The Indian Air Force will now induct 120 home-grown Tejas light fighter jets instead of the 40 planned earlier.

But an order jump, based on a complete rethink on the enormously delayed programme, rides on expectation that the current version of Tejas in the making, which lacks key features of a fourth generation fighter jet, will be packed with a power punch to overcome its outdatedness. :roll:

The IAF wants the existing Tejas to have Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, new electronic warfare suite and an array of beyond visual range missiles; all the features that were planned to be part of Tejas Mk II, which could never take-off.

The Indian Air Force will now induct 120 home-grown Tejas light fighter jets instead of the 40 planned earlier

A fresh agreement, setting the LCA programme on a new course, was signed on September 23 by all the stakeholders, including Indian Air Force, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), Centre for Military Airworthiness and Certification (CEMILAC) and others.

The IAF had placed orders for two squadrons (40 aircraft) of Tejas that was initially planned to replace Mig-21s.

The first batch of 20 was to be only a basic version and the second lot of equal number was to have added features, including mid-air refueling.


A new version of the aircraft, termed as Tejas Mk II, was planned to be developed with a more powerful GE F-414 engine.

It would have increased the length and weight of the existing aircraft. With a tardy progress on the first 40 aircraft and Mk II projected to become a reality only after 2023, the HAL offered Mk 1A, which was more advanced than the current version but less capable then the proposed Mk II.

The government has now approved only one version of Tejas dropping all the other nomenclatures. Highly-placed sources said that the main problem with the existing version of the aircraft is 57 maintenance issues.

At least 43 of these points can be resolved during serialised production by 2018. As per the new agreement, effort is being made to resolve these 43 points before 2018.

With the resolution of these issues and added capacity of AESA radar, advance weapons, electronic warfare suite and refuelling capability, the IAF will not need Tejas Mk II, said a senior officer.

Sources said the F- 414 engines, which were to be used in Tejas Mk II replacing F404, can be used for the naval variant of Tejas which anyway requires a bigger power plant for carrier operations.

Having settled the problem of potency of the aircraft, the delivery continues to remain a major challenge. HAL at the moment can produce only eight aircraft in a year.


To fulfil IAF’s new order it will have to double its capacity which will require herculean effort. The IAF hopes to have its maiden Tejas squadron with four aircraft by March next year while gradually incorporating the improvements.

With a limited endurance and range of only 300 km, Tejas was conceived for operations only on the western border.

But the whole orientation changed after 2009 when capacity building for a two front war scenario started. Officials hope that with the proposed additions, the existing version will be comparable to one of the best fighters in the world in its category.

The Government feels that instead of concentrating on Tejas Mk II, all the energies for design and development could be focused on the indigenous fifth generation fighter Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

It has been proposed that a foreign consultant is hired on the AMCA project right from the beginning to avoid glitches later in the development programme.

The feasibility report on AMCA is going to be finalised soon, said sources.

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby pragnya » 12 Oct 2015 08:46

if ADA had stuck to Mig 21 specs, IAF which has been hands off to begin with, lukewarm post its flying and a reluctant partner at best post 2006 to LCA - which btw is as good as an 'upgraded' M2K as per those who fly it, can anyone think they would have inducted an aircraft of Mig 21 capability (all metal, no FBW etc..) 10 years ago when the Mig 21s were that much younger? with IAF pinned to the MMRCA circus for the best of the best, i think not.

OTOH IMO the same 'ridiculed' science community, due to their farsightedness, has from the very same 'science project' given us a leg up in terms infra created, datapoints for future development, creating a vendor base, pool of talent, giving a modern fighter which is relevant for a few decades besides closing the wide gap wrt other countries.

let us also not forget the offshoots of LCA systems pollinating across other platforms in the AF.

delay - yes, the reasons have been debated to death but from a strategic, security perspective, the benefits of the effort far outweigh the delay/s that accrued especially for the IAF.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 12 Oct 2015 09:07

^^^

Adding ...

Through LCA, India has jumped to the "4th-Gen" technology. Apart from the U.S. ("5th-Gen"), most other so called advanced nations are in the "4.5 Gen" club. So India has bridged quite a bit of gap in a lot of aerospace technologies over the last 30-years. With AMCA in 15-years, India could reach par with the EU nations from general technology perspective. And in 30-years through UCAV and Scramjet projects, India could catchup with the U.S.

Only real sore point are the aeroengines. There is still bit of work to be done on that to catch up with leading nations.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3443
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby arshyam » 12 Oct 2015 09:44

shiv wrote:<snip>and there is that much-discussed story by Kota Harinarayana who wanted a pipe of a particular material and shape for the LCA and finally found an obscure workshop in Mumbai who did the work.

Shiv sir, I have been looking for a source about this story to share with someone who mentors young students in a small town, and use this anecdote as an example to inspire the young 'uns. But so far I haven't been able to find one. A BRF search showed only 2 older posts from you about this story :) - do you or anyone have a source I could use? Much obliged.

I did find a reference to a similar story about a Nasik businessman coming up with a very reliable switch for MiG-21s on request from Dr. KH, and other small companies producing various components for the Tejas, but it does not mention the Mumbai workshop. Sources: How the Tejas finally took off: Business Std and Dr KH's interview about the challenges: Tejas website. By any chance, was this the story you had in mind?

PS: The two linked articles should be mandatory reading for everyone before posting on this thread. Mods, can we link them on page 1's first post?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2015 11:27

Cain Marko wrote:
nileshjr wrote:I have been thinking, snip.


Huge assumptions here....But the other side of the coin...


Another thing to note is that legacy birds have been upgraded to newer levels including fcs, fly by wire, hotas, glass cockpit et al..


Well hypothetical situation it is and hence huge assumptions are bound to come.

Pray tell me which all legacy jet have been modified as such that you know of?? I could think of two - Mirage and Mig29 (and possibly B-2 in some ways).
Last edited by JayS on 12 Oct 2015 11:45, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2015 11:31

ramana wrote:
Kanson is right. Shiv had posted gifs of many HAL concept planes in the mid 70-80s. Shows design bureau was active.



Where can I find these gifs?? Can you or Shiv, please provide link??

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 12 Oct 2015 11:45

Looks like most of these scans all came from the same book:

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Image

Image

Image

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gyan » 12 Oct 2015 12:58

LCA programme can only move ahead if IAF agrees to take 120 LCA MK-1 FOC standard rather than trying to continue resisting by talking of MK-1A. In fact i feel, that We should order LCA MK-1 IOC STD+ BVR capability addition + Gun firing while things like AESA, air to air refueling, EW capability should be left to mid life upgrades.

How many Boeing 747, 787, Airbus 320, MKI were flying when we placed multi Billion orders on these foreign companies?

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 12 Oct 2015 13:28

One more timepass project from me
LCA versus Gripen - just 2 min long
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoV-Xx3B8NM

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1061
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Kailash » 12 Oct 2015 14:07

Gyan wrote:LCA programme can only move ahead if IAF agrees to take 120 LCA MK-1 FOC standard rather than trying to continue resisting by talking of MK-1A. In fact i feel, that We should order LCA MK-1 IOC STD+ BVR capability addition + Gun firing while things like AESA, air to air refueling, EW capability should be left to mid life upgrades.


+1

As we are hearing all the right noises, onus is now squarely on HAL's execution of the mk1 orders. Starting from operations research, sourcing the components, steering the local vendors, streamlining the production process and quality, try to do some cost cutting,value addition and speeding up in manufacture/assembly etc. For a change IP rests totally within india - so minor product changes should be cleared faster. Maximum lead time and risk would be with the engine,radar and radome.

MK1A would be a digression, though a very small one. Interesting point is that this was a complete HAL suggestion. How proficient are HAL engineers to do a weight reduction of this magnitude or the assess the impact of the same on CG and the control laws? Have they reached the level of maturity to not bother ADA/DRDO while performing these weight cuts or certification of existing weapons with the new AESA? Who will be bearing the cost/risk of testing MK1A?

Enough time has been lost discussing mk2 and attempts to procure the 414 etc. If they stabilize prod and IAF is happy with their quality after 2-3 squadrons are in service, MK1A would seem more doable.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gyan » 12 Oct 2015 16:19

I think that DM is forcing IAF to take 120 MK-1s, so all the Dalals have got together to support the cause for MK-1A. That's why we see all these half baked absurd leaks in DDM. The same happened with Arjun in 1994. I feel that out of 4 conditions for FOC, three should be dropped as LCA would be fit for initial service with BVR missiles, while other capabilities can be added as upgrades.

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby pragnya » 12 Oct 2015 16:28

Gyan wrote:I think that DM is forcing IAF to take 120 MK-1s, so all the Dalals have got together to support the cause for MK-1A. That's why we see all these half baked absurd leaks in DDM. The same happened with Arjun in 1994. I feel that out of 4 conditions for FOC, three should be dropped as LCA would be fit for initial service with BVR missiles, while other capabilities can be added as upgrades.


Gyan, to be fair to the ACM, he did not refer to mk 1, mk 1A or mark 2. infact he refused all these nomenclatures. IIRC he clearly said give the aircraft 'as is' and will take 6 squadrons of which obviously 1 SQ is of IOC 2 std and the rest FOC std. i guess the mk 1A will be added as and when available to make up 6 sq.

fwiw.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2015 17:08

Gyan wrote:I think that DM is forcing IAF to take 120 MK-1s, so all the Dalals have got together to support the cause for MK-1A. That's why we see all these half baked absurd leaks in DDM. The same happened with Arjun in 1994. I feel that out of 4 conditions for FOC, three should be dropped as LCA would be fit for initial service with BVR missiles, while other capabilities can be added as upgrades.


Right now the plan looks as good as it can get. Lets not complain now on that. FOC is just a ceremony. Induction is the real deal, if induction were held back due to FOC then we would have had reason to complain. But IAF is now ready to induct whatever HAL will churn out with all of them upgraded to FOC level as and when things happen. Its very common to have FOC after the a/c are inducted - e.g. EF2000 had a gap of 4 years between induction and FOC, to best of my knowledge. Its OK as long as all the stakeholders stick to this plan. IAF takes whatever is coming from HAL, ADA brings in promised changes ASAP, and HAL incorporates them in existing LCAs ASAP.

Heard a paanwala news who heard from chaiwala who might have heard from bhajjiwala. So please take it FWIW - don't quote me, don't blame me. MK2 is officially canceled..!! GE is pacified for loss of orders with new carrot from AMCA project which is being fast tracked.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20187
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 12 Oct 2015 17:35

How dare GE think that it will have a seat at the AMCA table? Don't they know that the Kaveri is to power the AMCA! Well ,that was all in the past.This old report from IDR says it all.

Sources close to idrw.org who spoke to us on Kaveri engine program, hinted that development of indigenously developed Engine to power an Indigenous Fighter jet might be delinked and after been in development of last three decades Kaveri engine is unlikely to power any fighter jet in future.

DRDO is not considering Development of Modified Kaveri engine for India’s 5th generation fighter jet AMCA and are looking for a suitable engine from abroad , DRDO has shortlisted some engine based on the required thrust to power AMCA and will be asking OEM’s to Provide further information .

GTRE a DRDO lab which is currently developing Kaveri engine few years back had proposed joint development of new Kaveri engine with French engine maker Snecma but for various reasons and due to strong opposition from Indian air force deal was never pursued and abandoned .

GTRE again had proposed that Kaveri engine when ready and hits production should power Tejas MK-1 batch when aircrafts are due for Mid-life engine change or upgrade but IAF again have declined this proposition and likely will continue to use American made GE engines.


On an AMCA note,can't understand why the EJ or a Russian engine aren't in the running.Both have TVC capabilities. When 4++ -gen aircraft like our MKIs have TVC,so too does the T-50,an AMCA without TVC will be a 5- gen bird.In fact future avatars of the Tejas should come with TVC.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby chaanakya » 12 Oct 2015 18:05

Cain Marko wrote:

I think Rohit has done more than enough too answer your questions. As far as the past goes and why the project was a national one and not purely iaf led, some may argue that this could have been done for political reasons; God knows the babus and ministers are insecure about the services and this was just another way of clipping the AF's wings..it is a huge speculation on your part that the iaf was left out simply because it was anti desi products. Couldn't be further from the truth..a major push for the lca came from ACM Idris Latif despite the misgivings of his juniors...

I am sure he has not answered it fully. But he is articulating IAF point of view and I understand that very well. I never said IAF is anti desi product. But fact remains that IAF has operated very little desi products and not encouraged in the least. That much should be pretty clear. Not their fault as we had no aerospace industry of experience in design and building de novo a/cs. Jet engine is still a problem.

And where did I speculate that IAF was left out because it was against desi product. Please point the reference.I have linked an article by one Air force officer whose suggestion was to make it "National Project". I am not aware of political or baboon type of push to make it a national one. It came from IAF.History bears it out that IAF took that option .

And it is institutionalised conditioning fostered by lack of availability of local products and in the whole scheme of things when there were ten+ ACMs with tenure of less than three years or so one ACM can not provide directional thrust. It needs sustained support right from the bottom level to the top.

All said and done ACM Raha has certainly done a great job of committing 120+. This would be watershed event in the history of Aviation Industry of India.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Wickberg » 12 Oct 2015 18:11

All this talk about "India should not have taken such a big bite in the 1980s and trying to build a multirole fighter, it was too ambitious" I think is bollocks. What was India suppose to do? All, I say ALL, fighter-projects from that era was multi-role, Gripen, Rafale, Eurofighter, Novi Avion, Kfir etc. It actually started 20 years earlier and for example Sweden tried to get attack/fighter/recon. into one and similar airframe from the scratch - the SAAB 37 Viggen. Now that was´nt 100% multirole/swing (not at all, long from it) but it paved the way for the idea and was started in the 1960s. For India 20 years later to build an exclusive short-range air-defence plane to replace the (already obsolete) MiG-21 seems like not only one step back in time, but two. How would that have benefitted the Indian aviation industry? Sure, it must be better to be one step ahead instead?
Last edited by Wickberg on 12 Oct 2015 18:13, edited 1 time in total.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby chaanakya » 12 Oct 2015 18:12

nileshjr wrote:

Right now the plan looks as good as it can get. Lets not complain now on that. FOC is just a ceremony. Induction is the real deal, if induction were held back due to FOC then we would have had reason to complain. But IAF is now ready to induct whatever HAL will churn out with all of them upgraded to FOC level as and when things happen. Its very common to have FOC after the a/c are inducted - e.g. EF2000 had a gap of 4 years between induction and FOC, to best of my knowledge. Its OK as long as all the stakeholders stick to this plan. IAF takes whatever is coming from HAL, ADA brings in promised changes ASAP, and HAL incorporates them in existing LCAs ASAP.

Heard a paanwala news who heard from chaiwala who might have heard from bhajjiwala. So please take it FWIW - don't quote me, don't blame me. MK2 is officially canceled..!! GE is pacified for loss of orders with new carrot from AMCA project which is being fast tracked.

I would disagree to that statement. ADA would be ready for FOC after incorporating all the changes. But IAF takes its job seriously and FOC tests would be as grueling as it comes. rest assured. IAF would not compromise. The only thing they have been asked to do is not to move goal posts every now and then and take iterative route.

The main issue would be whether HAL and its present management is up to the task or needs kick in the a$$.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3415
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby suryag » 12 Oct 2015 18:39

Nileshjr ji i hope your paanwaala is incorrect for a change

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36394
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 12 Oct 2015 19:04

Mk2 should not be officially cancelled in a hurry burry.. nor the Kaveri program. roll them up into other projects, and empower the usage model.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2015 19:09

chaanakya wrote:I would disagree to that statement. ADA would be ready for FOC after incorporating all the changes. But IAF takes its job seriously and FOC tests would be as grueling as it comes. rest assured. IAF would not compromise. The only thing they have been asked to do is not to move goal posts every now and then and take iterative route.

The main issue would be whether HAL and its present management is up to the task or needs kick in the a$$.


Arre saar, grueling testing is given. Unless and until each and every feature is fully tested, it will not come in the Serial production LCAs. The main change in IAF stance is FOC is not per-requisite now for induction in sizable numbers, but it can be allowed even as LCA enters squadron service. IAF would need 4-5 years to fully operationalize LCA. By then FOC with all the 4 required features should come about. FOC will not affect the LCA orders, manufacturing plane anymore, since IAF is accepting whatever is currently available. In that sense FOC is a ceremony now and not a Go-NoGo test for induction.

Suryag wrote:Nileshjr ji i hope your paanwaala is incorrect for a change

Well he was right about Rafale deal few months before Modi's visit to France when he told me that rafale deal is as good as canceled. Original deal is indeed canceled. And we have number of sources saying so about MK2 already.

What he told me goes along very well with what we know, that GoI do not want MK1/ MK1A et al for LCA. Only one version. They want to expedite AMCA. GE raised a point about its investment in F414 "single engine reliability" features already done, but they are shown AMCA carrot. Kaveri 110kN is also being discussed. I think EJ200 is ditched. It will be Kaveri vs F414. May be first batch (definitely the prototypes) might have F414 and later batches might have Kaveri. Also NLCA will go on as planned.

The way I see it is, the possibility of IAF coming back for lean NLCA as MK2 for them remain as Navy to AF version is easier transition anyway and can be done quickly. I am also hoping it will go that way. I also want to see Kaveri on LCA one day. LCA gives a great chance to not only reach sanctioned sq strength but actually go beyond that. But we can only wait and watch.
Last edited by JayS on 12 Oct 2015 19:25, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 12 Oct 2015 19:10

nileshjr wrote:Heard a paanwala news who heard from chaiwala who might have heard from bhajjiwala. So please take it FWIW - don't quote me, don't blame me. MK2 is officially canceled..!! GE is pacified for loss of orders with new carrot from AMCA project which is being fast tracked.

Unlikely IMO. The NLCA needs the 414. The NLCA is not going to be cancelled

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_29190 » 12 Oct 2015 19:22

nileshjr wrote:
Gyan wrote:
Heard a paanwala news who heard from chaiwala who might have heard from bhajjiwala. So please take it FWIW - don't quote me, don't blame me. MK2 is officially canceled..!! GE is pacified for loss of orders with new carrot from AMCA project which is being fast tracked.


My personal opinion, I feel this makes sense. If we are going to built a MK2, we should target for a LO LCA. No point building just a bigger plane to be inducted in next decade. It should be bigger and stealth, which in theory is AMCA.

Continue with LCA MK1/ 1A, built in numbers and upgrade them.

Divert the F414 & MK2 efforts towards AMCA program. You get a bigger & stealth jet. Use common parts from LCA and it's production line, which would have matured.

Ofcourse given that MK2 is primarly a Navy programme, someone needs to pacify them. Will they take a N-AMCA?

Can we not make the mistake this time and built N-AMCA FIRST, before the airforce version?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2015 19:37

shiv wrote:Unlikely IMO. The NLCA needs the 414. The NLCA is not going to be cancelled

Was adding that part about NLCA in above post when you posted already.Only MK2 is getting cancelled not NLCA. I should have said so clearly beforehand. Sorry for that. MK2 and NLCA are two different programs. But again its paanwalla news only. :)

nit wrote:My personal opinion, I feel this makes sense. If we are going to built a MK2, we should target for a LO LCA. No point building just a bigger plane to be inducted in next decade. It should be bigger and stealth, which in theory is AMCA.

Continue with LCA MK1/ 1A, built in numbers and upgrade them.

Divert the F414 & MK2 efforts towards AMCA program. You get a bigger & stealth jet. Use common parts from LCA and it's production line, which would have matured.

Ofcourse given that MK2 is primarly a Navy programme, someone needs to pacify them. Will they take a N-AMCA?

Can we not make the mistake this time and built N-AMCA FIRST, before the airforce version?


If not for IAF, at least as demonstrator for next gen technologies LO MK2 should be attempted side by side the AMCA project. All the new technologies for AMCA should be put on one LCA airframe for Proof of Concept. This time no excuse. We have a flying jet at hand. Also Kaveri can be mated to one of the LCA airframe once its tested on Mig-29 flying testbed which is planned to be acquired. And whatever we have learned so far de-risking the project is necessary from IAF's Op preparedness.

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby pragnya » 12 Oct 2015 19:44

nileshjr wrote:Arre saar, grueling testing is given. Unless and until each and every feature is fully tested, it will not come in the Serial production LCAs. The main change in IAF stance is FOC is not per-requisite now for induction in sizable numbers, but it can be allowed even as LCA enters squadron service. IAF would need 4-5 years to fully operationalize LCA. By then FOC with all the 4 required features should come about. FOC will not affect the LCA orders, manufacturing plane anymore, since IAF is accepting whatever is currently available. In that sense FOC is a ceremony now and not a Go-NoGo test for induction.


to the bolded, i think that is not how i understood from the ACM's press briefing. what he means (i could be wrong) when he says 'as is' that IOC 2 - 1sq, rest 5sq as per the FOC needs to be speeded up. the change is wrt IAF's earlier plan mark 2 numbers of 4sq are clubbed. that is all. so don't assume FOC is going to be a ceremonial. ADA/HAL will have to deliver on the agreed FOC parameters like BVR, IFR integration by march 2016 (?). the mark 1A may roll out much later which will take over when available which means AESA radar and EW integration possibly can come later with mark 1A. as you rightly said the IAF may take 4/5 years to fully operationalise LCA into its matrix, that will also give ADA/HAL to do parallel work on mark 1A.

shiv wrote:Unlikely IMO. The NLCA needs the 414. The NLCA is not going to be cancelled


shiv IMO mark 2 will continue as a naval version but may be called something else instead of mark 2. i am sure IAF will grab some squadrons of these suitably modified for them atleast in terms of landing gear, levcons, tailhook etc.. which they do not need. better if ADA is prepared for this.
Last edited by pragnya on 12 Oct 2015 20:00, edited 1 time in total.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_29190 » 12 Oct 2015 19:47

I would also say Navy should push for N-AMCA first. NLCA is planned to arrive around 2022. That is 7 years from now. Wouldn't it be worth while to put those 7 years for N-AMCA? instead of deploying a single engine aircraft on carriers?

Built NLCA MK1 & 2 prototypes to test carrier ops. Work on N-AMCA in parellel. Deploy N-AMCA on carriers.

Navy will be happy they get the priority and resources are not diverted.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 12 Oct 2015 19:59

pragnya wrote:shiv IMO mark 2 will continue as a naval version but may be called something else instead of mark 2. i am sure IAF will grab some squadrons of these suitably modified for them atleast in terms of landing gear, levcons, tailhook etc.. which they do not need. better if ADA is prepared for this.

Arup Raha was very clear in saying that he does not want to use those designations - M1, 2, 3, 4 etc. In fact IIRC he even says "Leave that to us". We are looking for incremental improvements and modifications and HAD and HAL have promised to do that. He was at pains to say that the IAF will team up with these agencies and all will take collective responsibility and accountability

With the IAF chief having said this, I cannot understand why we on BRF are going on discussing about Mk 1A Mk 2 etc. I think those designations are going to be discarded. Not the modifications and improvements. . Maybe HAL and ADA coined the designation Mk2. I cannot exactly recall how or who came up with the designation mark 1A. I would be glad to see a link to a statement or article so I can understand

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby pragnya » 12 Oct 2015 20:05

shiv wrote:
pragnya wrote:shiv IMO mark 2 will continue as a naval version but may be called something else instead of mark 2. i am sure IAF will grab some squadrons of these suitably modified for them atleast in terms of landing gear, levcons, tailhook etc.. which they do not need. better if ADA is prepared for this.

Arup Raha was very clear in saying that he does not want to use those designations - M1, 2, 3, 4 etc. In fact IIRC he even says "Leave that to us". We are looking for incremental improvements and modifications and HAD and HAL have promised to do that. He was at pains to say that the IAF will team up with these agencies and all will take collective responsibility and accountability

With the IAF chief having said this, I cannot understand why we on BRF are going on discussing about Mk 1A Mk 2 etc. I think those designations are going to be discarded. Not the modifications and improvements. . Maybe HAL and ADA coined the designation Mk2. I cannot exactly recall how or who came up with the designation mark 1A. I would be glad to see a link to a statement or article so I can understand


you are right shiv. as for as IAF is concerned these differentiations don't exist but for our ease of understanding (as addicted to these nomenclatures from time immemorial) it will take some time to settle i guess. :)

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Vipul » 13 Oct 2015 05:13

IAF to order 100 modified Tejas aircraft.

Changing its long standing stance on the abilities of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is now convinced that an improved version of the homegrown fighter that is being ordered will perform better that the JF17 that is being produced in Pakistan.

The IAF is placing an order for 100 modified Tejas aircraft in addition to an older order for 20 planes, confident that it would beat the Pakistani competitor on four parameters — reach, weapons, ability to kill and survivability.

With the upgraded LCA line to be activated, the air force will rejig its fighter procurement plans to accommodate 120 of the indigenous planes within the next 11 years, defence ministry officials said.

"This line of Tejas will fill an acute shortage as our Mirage, Jaguars and MiG-29s are due to retire in 10 years," a defence ministry official told ET.(DDM reporting)

The air force has, however, asked Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to add newer capabilities in the Tejas. The four new specifications include an Active Electronically Scanned Array ( AESA) radar, along range beyond visual range missile, air-to-air refueling and electronic warfare capability which will enhance survivability of the aircraft, senior defence ministry officials said.

"Once HAL and ADA assures the design and development of this Tejas variant, the air force will step up to order 100 additional aircrafts after the first 20 are delivered," the official said.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53478
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 13 Oct 2015 05:20

deejay have some request in OT thread in GDF

member_22906
BRFite
Posts: 305
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_22906 » 13 Oct 2015 08:13

Very very interesting...

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/10/a-second-tejas-assembly-line.html


As this newspaper has reported, there has been a major breakthrough in one of India’s most ambitious and expensive weapons development projects --- the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) --- with the Indian Air Force (IAF) now willing to accept 100 improved fighters. The Tejas Mark IA, as some call the improved version, will have air-to-air refuelling, improved radar, missiles to strike enemy aircraft beyond visual range and electronic jammers to blind enemy radar. For Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), which is struggling to build even the first 20 fighters, the IAF’s acceptance constitutes an embarrassment of riches. Going by HAL’s current rate of assembly, delivering 120 Tejas fighters will take a decade.

The real Tejas numbers will, in fact, be well above 120. Given that the IAF has finally accepted the Tejas Mark 1A as a capable replacement for its 13 squadrons of MiG-21s and MiG-27s, it will need at least 250 Tejas fighters before the end of the decade, when the obsolescent MiGs must be retired. Furthermore, the IAF requires another 20 more Tejas Mark 1A for training. The navy, meanwhile, has declared it needs at least 56 Tejas Mark II (with more powerful engines) for its two indigenous aircraft carriers. That adds up to well above 300 Tejas fighters.

It should be obvious to planners in South Block that the Tejas cannot possibly be built in these numbers, in an acceptable time-frame, without establishing another assembly line to double the efforts of HAL’s current Tejas line in Bengaluru. This is the golden opportunity the defence ministry has been seeking for nurturing a private sector competitor to HAL. The ministry must select a private company, transfer to it the technology needed to build the Tejas, and order 150 fighters in short order.

The ministry is already attempting to build up a private sector aerospace manufacturer, but in a misconceived project. A Tata-Airbus consortium has been asked to build 56 transport aircraft to replace the IAF’s venerable Avro fleet. There are many problems with this proposal: It does not envisage building an indigenous aircraft; it makes no economic sense to set up full-scale production infrastructure, including an airfield, for just 56 aircraft; a multinational giant (Airbus) will hold disproportionate clout in the partnership, and most crucially, the Avro has never had an operational role beyond ferrying air marshals around the country. Neither will its replacement.

In contrast, a parallel Tejas production line would be a perfect launch pad for a private aerospace corporation. Unlike HAL, which has an aerospace empire sprawling across the country, a private sector aerospace entrant would per force have to develop a network of vendors and sub-vendors, upon which it would rely for systems, sub-systems and components, while reserving for itself only final integration --- assembling the parts and rolling out, inspecting and testing full-built Tejas fighters. In contrast, HAL avoids sub-vendors, keeping profits within the company by farming out manufacture to its own numerous divisions.

A parallel private sector production line would also create competition to make the Tejas cheaper. For this, the private company must be encouraged to partner an established western corporation like Saab, Eurofighter, Lockheed Martin or Dassault. Many have signalled interest in partnering India; Saab had even put forward a full-scale proposal that was largely ignored in New Delhi. The chosen foreign vendor should be incentivised to bring in contemporary aerospace manufacturing technologies and best practices.

While HAL’s single production line would not meet even the IAF’s requirements, adding a parallel line would open up exports. So far, with the IAF itself unwilling to accept the Tejas, there has been little prospect of exporting this excellent fighter --- buyers usually reason, “If the home air force is not interested, why should we be?” But, with the IAF now inducting the fighter in numbers, the Tejas can establish a presence in the global light fighter market. Even at its current cost of Rs 240 crore ($40 million), which includes the aircraft, ground equipment, test equipment and spares, it is reasonably priced, given its fourth-generation configuration --- a fly-by-wire fighter, built of composite materials.

The Tejas’ current price can be lowered, given that it is currently planned and built in the most uneconomical manner possible --- with little outsourcing, an inadequate assembly line and orders placed in penny-packets, which eliminates economy of scale. Instead of this, working on an assured order of 100-150 aircraft, with a vendor chain developed deliberately, and the incorporation of international best practices in assembly, would lower the Tejas’ cost substantially. This would boost the prospect of export, especially when backed by an international vendor’s marketing expertise and global marketing chains. This prospect of global export would be an added attraction for international vendors.

In sum, bringing in a private sector company to establish a parallel production line for the Tejas would do more than just create an aerospace alternative. It would also ensure the Tejas is inducted into IAF service at least twice as fast, filling up a worrying operational gap. Second, global standards and best practices would come into domestic aerospace manufacture. Third, modern assembly lines and competition would drive down the cost of the Tejas, benefiting the IAF as well as export prospects. Finally, the entry of the private sector into aerospace would spread dynamism and flexibility across the industry.

There are difficulties too, and the first is to select a private company that would benefit enormously from government largesse --- including access to airfield infrastructure, since demanding that the company establishes its own would raise the cost of entry unrealistically. Given the cutthroat competition between private sector aspirants in defence, the ministry would need a clear and transparent formula for selecting a winner, one that could withstand inevitably bitter scrutiny from the losers. This would naturally involve assessments of financial health, track records in manufacture, core areas of expertise, and past delivery records. Competition will be intense, given that the ministry would be giving the winner a leg-up into the ranks of global aerospace manufacturers, just as it spent taxpayer billions to make HAL what it is today. A clear public rationale will have to justify the decision.

A sceptical HAL unsurprisingly scoffs at the notion of a rival private sector assembly line. Senior executives point to what happened three months ago when HAL, already preoccupied with three simultaneous helicopter programmes (the light combat helicopter, light utility helicopter and weaponised Dhruv), issued a proposal offering the private sector full technology transfer to build the Dhruv advanced light helicopter in India. HAL officials say not a single private vendor accepted the challenge.


HAL also points out that the private sector Tejas line would run for, say, a decade, but the company would have to logistically support the fighter for the next thirty years. This is true, even if it betrays an unreasonable suspicion of the private sector that has a reasonable record of supporting products. What is true, though, is that if the private sector fails to respond to an invitation to build the Tejas, or does not support the fighter through its service life, this would be a black mark forever.

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1061
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Kailash » 13 Oct 2015 09:18

http://idrw.org/tejas-once-combat-ready-will-be-able-to-outgun-the-pakistan-jf-17-fighters/#more-75644

The indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft will be able to thrash the Pakistani JF-17 'Thunder' fighters in "reach, punch and ability to kill and survive in an engagement", top Indian defence officials asserted.

But that will be possible only when the Tejas is ready with an AESA (active electronically scanned array) radar, mid-air refuelling, long-range BVR (beyond visual range) missiles and advanced electronic warfare capabilities. Moreover, the single-engine fighter has to undergo 43 "improvements" out of the 57 "weaknesses" detected in its maintainability, which will ensure it can land and take off again within an hour, the officials said.

All this will take another three years at the very least, further prolonging the already tortuous development saga of the country's first home fighter that began way back in 1983. Even if defence PSU Hindustan Aeronautics manages to ramp up its production rate to 12 jets from the existing eight per year, all the 120 Tejas planned so far for IAF will be inducted only by 2026 or so.

The development of a Tejas Mark-II, with a more powerful engine, in turn, would be possible only by 2024-2025 at the earliest, with the production to follow thereafter. Consequently, the proposed Tejas Mark-II for the IAF now stands scrapped, though it will continue for the Navy, as was earlier reported by TOI.

The plan now is to jump directly onto the development of the indigenous fifth-generation fighter aircraft, the twin-engine AMCA (advanced medium combat aircraft), from the single-engine Tejas Mark-I, as part of the overall rejig of fighter induction plans.


"DRDO-HAL will now fully focus on producing the improved Tejas as well as designing and developing the AMCA, which should start coming in by 2035 when the upgraded Mirage-2000s and MiG-29s begin retiring," said an official.

Tejas remains crucial to make up the depleting numbers in IAF, which is down to just 35 fighter squadrons and will reach its sanctioned figure of 42 squadrons only by 2027 or so. With a limited range of just over 400 km, the Tejas will basically be used for "air defence" to take on incoming enemy fighters or "close air-to-ground" operations to support the Army.

The "strike packages" deep into enemy territory will perforce have to be undertaken by fighters like the Russian-origin Sukhoi-30MKIs and the Rafales being acquired from France. "But the Tejas, after the 43 improvements, will be more than able to outgun the similar JF-17, which Pakistan is inducting with China's help," said an official.

"Tejas will help in plugging the gaps that will further arise after all the existing 10 MiG-21 and four MiG-27 squadrons are retired by 2025. It was never meant to replace a MMRCA (medium multi-role combat aircraft) like Rafale or a heavyweight Sukhoi-30MKI," he added.


This is inline with nilesh's account.
Last edited by Kailash on 13 Oct 2015 09:22, edited 1 time in total.

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1061
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Kailash » 13 Oct 2015 09:20

http://idrw.org/air-force-commanders-conference-from-october-13-induction-of-tejas-to-be-discussed/#more-75640

Also under discussion would be IAF's plan to induct 120 indigenously-developed Light Combat Aircraft Tejas. Though the Air Force was initially unhappy with the aircraft, it later agreed to induct 120 Tejas with four main modifications including that to its missile carrying capability, better radar and mid-air refuelling facility.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Vamsee and 30 guests