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.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18665
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 11 Nov 2015 22:19

DARE mentions Tusker is state of the art EW suite. It may have well included DRFM based deception jamming too.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ezhzTDjWMTA/ ... -27UPG.jpg

The noise jamming bit was from a visitor to an aero show & those comments are not always certain.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18665
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 11 Nov 2015 22:22

This is the source - so noise jamming it is, but again could have been upgraded later (difference between brochure to brochure).

TUSKER Pod
is another pod developed by DARE which houses noise jammers.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49638120/Indi ... ion#scribd

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7923
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 11 Nov 2015 22:51

Good points Karan, I'll add my 2 cents...

With noise jamming you can practice different modes. The most prohibitive mode but often the one most required in modern times for this approach to be successful (and a main reason why plain noise jamming is loosing favor) is the barrage jamming mode. Essentially with Noise jamming you are trying to create a disruption into the EMS so that the signal the Receivers (enemy's) are looking for is overloaded or somehow obscured. With a Spot Jamming mode you use a receiver, or ideally a set of receivers to ID a signal and then you basically (provided you have that frequency covered) tune your emitter to that frequency and jam away. The receivers therefore allow you to narrow down on the frequency of your jamming apparatus and enable you to focus much larger power in a narrower band for maximum effect. This works great for systems (radars) designed in the 60's, 70's and even the 80's. However modern phased array systems and increasingly AESA's (which are not pretty much standard) have available to them their own sophisticated Receivers, linked up and are also (especially the AESA's) capable of operating over a wider frequency compared to legacy systems. Therefore a proliferated AESA network forces a noise jammer to operate in barrage jam mode. Barrage jamming is essentially noise jamming where the jammer operates over a very wide band of frequencies with the added benefit that if you are capable of barrage jamming you can generally cover more than one type of emitter. Now both forms of jamming have their drawbacks. For successful spot jamming against modern systems you need to have a very dense receiver setup and strong data links. Additionally for spot jamming you need to be able to counter agile waveforms but the counter is increasingly a loosing battle. Also such spot jamming is one of the most sophisticated capabilities in EA when it comes to jammers and electronics packaging (often dubbed Follower Jamming). With enough computing power and agility available to these systems they can essentially perform (either fully or within their threshold) inside the jammers OODA loop by operating in very fast hopping mode. This basically outfoxes even the most sophisticated follower jamming technique. There are other ways besides of very very fast hops to outfox a follower jammer that involve manipulating your emissions to carry a lot of SPAM but those involve highly complex computational capability and may only exist in very very expensive integrated avionics setups. This then gets us to barrage jamming. The biggest negative for such a jammer is the cost, size, weight, power and cooling requirements that are imposed on pure barrage jammers essentially making them incompatible with all but dedicated EW aircraft that have no air-combat requirements. Simply put you are spreading a lot of power, a lot of energy over a very wide set of frequencies and this limits which platforms can effectively conduct barrage jamming, particularly at range. In case of the USN and USAF for example not even the highest technology available will allow a low-frequency pod (you can load it up with anything from highly powerful gallium nitride emmitters etc to whatever is the standard in computing) on a fighter sized aircraft to do barrage jamming over the low-frequency range from medium to stand off distances. For that you need HUGE pods that are incompatible with a fighter sized aircraft. For higher frequencies you can do stand off spot jamming but the power requirement to do barrage jamming will still be in many 10's of Killowatts even against a 90's level threat.

Now DRFM jamming is a different as its a counter to search and track radars and is platform specific i.e. you do your own DFRM deception jamming. You can't count on escorting a platform using that approach however. Effectively what you are looking to do (DFRM is quite old with publicly available patents to systems dating to the early 70's) is defeat tracking by taking the interrogating pulse, delaying them and reradiating manipulated signals with the purpose of either generating false targets, presenting a false range or velocity gate or other types of false information. Like any other type of jamming short of the utopian "owning the entire RF spectrum" aircraft or weapons can also develop and execute countermeasures to overcome DRFM jamming much like anything else provided the opponent stays a couple of steps ahead of the threat (easier said then done however). DRFM is popular on fighters for survivability because the size, weight and cooling requirements are much smaller since the object is not to stay hidden, but to complicate the enemy's targeting process and reduce his Situational Awareness particularly in the end state - hence they are very powerful and much desired upgrade options for non-stealthy aircraft that short of carrying growler like pods cannot stay hidden to enemy sensor and therefore must try to deny the enemy high quality situational awareness as opposed to surprise that low observables provide.
Last edited by brar_w on 11 Nov 2015 23:44, edited 7 times in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18665
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 11 Nov 2015 23:08

True..That entire state of the art pod could also mean supporting the widest array of noise jamming modes..
Either ways.. the LCA pod is likely to be a repackaged RWJ in a pod format.. hopefully the PV1 trials are going quick
Software testing is so time consuming.. the AEW&C has been in trials for many many months now, even though its radar was at TRL8, clearly the Battle Management & coordinated functions are being methodically checked and cleared/validated

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7923
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 11 Nov 2015 23:48

Karan I seriously doubt that would be an approach for the LCA. Even heavier aircraft that are looking at all aspect Electronic warfare supplement to enable offensive/defensive ops are relying on DRFM and deceptive jamming modes. F-15's, Gripens, F-16's and F/A-18's, Sukhois and Migs.. are all exploiting that technology heavily with noise jamming being restricted to areas where the threat is significant as opposed to wider frequency ranges. Going after noise jamming over even a moderate frequency range will require a lot of surplus power that most fighters lack. Depending upon the range you need to be able to hide a lot of return (since you are not stealthy) and that requires more power while solid state electronics (1-2W per mm should be doable using GaA MMICs) will enable effective high level Deceptive jamming against a wide threat base. . Deceptive jamming is a much more sophisticated and honestly elegant way of making 4-4.5 generation aircraft more survivable and that should be an area where the LCA research should primarily concentrate on imho..It is also the best way to achieve integrated EW/EA on a maneuvering, multi role fighter without eating into its weapons stations. With upgrades you can turn your highest power source (FCR) into a jammer and then slowly build up jamming modes and capabilities. Noise jamming especially wideband noise jamming is best left for escort packages using pods and not integrated into a standard EW suite of every fighter since generally with enough power one or two aircraft in a formation can provide escort protection enabling better optimized packages.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18665
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 12 Nov 2015 00:25

Brar..i said
"True..That entire state of the art pod could also mean supporting the widest array of noise jamming modes.. "

Refers to Tusker

"Either ways.. the LCA pod is likely to be a repackaged RWJ in a pod format.. hopefully the PV1 trials are going quick"

RWJ = DRFM based radar warning jammer

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 12 Nov 2015 05:51

pragnya wrote:
Karan M wrote:Pragnya, I suspect it will be added to Mk1A itself since the Mk2 program for the IAF is for all purposes, at present, not confirmed. Only the Mk2 for the Navy exists as a confirmed.


thanks Karan.

EW suite was tested on PV 1 in jan 15. from this brochure i can atleast surmise - from the second part of the brochure, SIVA pod is one which is integrated into the DARE architecture which would be for SEAD/DEAD. what are the options for Escort jammer? guess they would be Israeli ones? IIRC DARE and Israelis were involved in the EW suite called Mayavi though this was many years ago. what is the status on that and which Israeli jammer is part of the DARE architecture shown in the brochure?


From the above press release:
...
New Generation Electronic Warfare Equipment Integrated on TEJAS Aircraft”. Ms J Manjula, OS and Director DARE said “LCA is the first fighter aircraft of India fitted with a Radar Warner and Jammer equipment. It has capability for both Radar warning and jamming using a Unified EW Technology. Over the coming few months, ADA and DARE will be scheduling further sorties to evaluate the system in various signal scenarios”.
...

LCA will have the first Unified EW then. More and more becoming a super-duper fighter with everything in it ;)

Applying most of these tech with some mod/upg on the AMCA TD (and even AMCA Mk.1) should greatly speed it up.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Singha » 12 Nov 2015 07:38

we need some 24 su30 converted into growler config to provide specialized services . perhaps a large RAT underbelly and various combo pods & ARM(dual racked) under wings and wingtip. it can go in with max 9ton fuel as the mission does not demand ACM. make 3 squadrons of 8 each - 1 for SWAC, and 2 for the east, deployed in depth.

USN seems to have spread 85 growlers across 11 squadrons. so around 8 / squadron.
australia will eventually have 24 (12 converted, 12 new build).
usaf alleged to have 44 F-16CJ (block 50 and 52 mix)

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby pragnya » 12 Nov 2015 09:09

thanks brar, Karan for the illuminating posts. much appreciated.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby vina » 12 Nov 2015 09:39

pragnya wrote:on a side note, will the OBOGS system which was handed over to ADA in dec 14 be integrated to SP versions of LCA 1s?

Excellent. This was needed and withuout it, the entire IFR business is pointless. Also will help reducing weight by around atleast 200 kgs or so by getting rid of heavy oxygen air bottles and improve turnaround and availability and remove the need for the bases to have oxygen separation facilities.

Looks like what DEBEL has done is to replicate the Honeywell twin chamber pressure swing adsorption stuff going back to the 80s. Good. The entire thing weighs around 30Kgs or so per Honeywell brochures. Anyways, the current tech /research seems to be in membrane based diffusion type separation systems. The next versions should move to that tech, maybe have another 15 years or so to go before that comes about , matures and is able to be fitted in newer platforms.

And from the links I posted earlier, only the PAK-FA of all the Russian fighters seems to have an OBOGs. Safe to say, the SU-30 today probably doesnt have one, and so too probably the Mirage 2000s, Mig 29s and Jaguars in Indian service.

member_29245
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_29245 » 12 Nov 2015 11:31

the Su30MKI dosent have OBOGS - it was posed in one of the articels about indian OBOGS so i dont think there is any confusion about it

it was also said that the indian OBOGS will be fitted on Su30MKI

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1604
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 13 Nov 2015 05:02

Karan and Brar....
Robust discussion and so informative. They way you respond to each other was another highlight.

You set the standards of what every BRFite should be aiming for.
Kudos to you my dear Sirs....

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 13 Nov 2015 06:57

^indeed.. salute to brar and karan for such posts.

on the spot jamming.. in a squadron of say 12-18 LCAs, can't we have a CAS role, spot jamming platform - say two pods for external fuel tank, a couple of A2As, and the rest of the pylons available for spot jamming. now I am thinking where the power would come for these? perhaps a power pod?

arthuro
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 06 Sep 2008 13:35

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby arthuro » 13 Nov 2015 19:08

India To Boost LCA Order; AF Questions Its Capabilities

NEW DELHI — The Indian government will increase orders for its homegrown Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), called Tejas, from 20 to 120, but Air Force officials question the plane's capabilities, and the scheduled arrival of a more advanced model remains murky.

However, Indian Air Force officials said the move to increase reliance on the Tejas, delayed by more than 15 years, would severely compromise India's combat worthiness because this would lead to total dependence on state owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL), which the officials said has a poor record of delivery and quality.

Besides, LCA-Mark1 will be able to meet only the low end of Air Force requirements, a senior Air Force official said.

A Ministry of Defence official, however, said the Air Force ordered additional LCAs with features more advanced than the LCA-Mark 1, including a self-protection jammer, an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar to be procured from Elta of Israel, and air-to-air refueling capability. This version of the aircraft would be labeled LCA-Mark 1A, he said.

But an Air Force official said the decision to boost the order for LCA-Mark 1s was forced on them by the government to support its policy of "Make in India" defense projects.

A decade ago, Air Force officials said that its combat needs would be met only with the LCA-Mark 2, which will be powered by a higher thrust GE 414 engine, compared to the GE-404 engine currently powering the LCA-1 and LCA-1A.

HAL not only has a poor record or delivering on time, but produces inferior products, the Air Force official said.

Retired Air Marshal Subhash Bhojwani said that while the AESA radar and air-to-air refueling capability would compensate for most of the LCA's operational deficiencies, "with regard to day-to-day line maintenance I understand Tejas is still an engineer's nightmare.

"I have yet to see any HAL aircraft where the canopy of one aircraft fits another without a lot of adjustments, the same for any other airframe component. Each aircraft seems to be ever so slightly different; this is a major shortcoming. US- and French-origin aircraft are designed from drawing board onwards to be easy to repair and parts are freely swappable. If HAL has made Tejas more maintenance-friendly than its predecessor products, then my stated opinion would need to undergo modification," Bhojwani said.

Analysts, however, said purchase of additional LCA-Mark 1As might be the best solution to meet immediate fighter aircraft requirements.

"With the IAF's fixed-wing fighter fleet witnessing an alarming decrease, the homegrown LCA-Mark 1A seems to be the quickest solution to arrest this decline. However, a more long-term solution needs to be found in terms of offensive capability," said Ankur Gupta, a defense analyst with Earnest and Young India.

Nitin Mehta, a New Delhi-based defense analyst, said, "After canceling the 2007 tender for the purchase of 126 medium multirole combat aircraft and purchasing 36 French Rafales instead, combining with an increase in orders for the LCA-Mark1A is the best decision to check the falling fleet strength of fighter aircraft."

Another Air Force official said that HAL cannot be relied on to deliver the additional LCA-Mark 1As in a timely fashion.

"It would have been much better to either procure fighter combat aircraft from overseas on a fast-track basis or set up another aerospace agency other than HAL to manufacture the increased numbers of LCA-Mark 1A," the official said.

Hal officials have said they do not respond to such criticism, and that they will meet the delivery schedule.

A HAL official said the Air Force has given an initial order of 20 LCA-Mark 1s and thereafter more than 100 LCA-Mark 1As will be ordered after final operational clearance is achieved, expected next year.

Over the next three years, the HAL official said, the company will increase production capability from the current level of four aircraft annually to seven in 2016-17 and eight in 2017-18. After 2017-18, HAL will boost its capacity to 16 each year.

"I can only presume that the Tejas [upgraded with better sensors and avionics] now meets the low-end needs of the IAF, although I think it will be largely utilized in its own airspace, thus freeing up more capable platforms to do the more challenging cross-border missions," Bhojwani said.

With increased orders for LCA-1A, the fate of LCA-Mark 2, still in development stage, is now uncertain, the Air Force official official said.

"To the best of my understanding, the LCA-Mark 2 is many, many years away. I don't think a single prototype has been built yet so the earlier projected timelines do not stand true," Gupta said. Initial operational certification and final operational clearance for LCA Mark-2 could stretch well into 2025, Gupta said.

The MoD official, however, said with the addition of an AESA radar, a jammer and air-to-air refueling capability, the LCA-Mark 1A should meet the operational needs of the Air Force, but declined to say when the LCA-Mark 2 will be completed.


http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /75645752/
Last edited by arthuro on 13 Nov 2015 19:30, edited 1 time in total.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 13 Nov 2015 19:18

^^^

So who is this unnamed "Air Force Official" that the article keeps quoting? Anyways, this one is written by one of well-known DDMs Vivek Raghuvanshi.
Last edited by srai on 13 Nov 2015 19:27, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 13 Nov 2015 19:27

too many officials talking too many things. we need some stricter chain of command in these matters. [another way to destroy DDM]

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gyan » 13 Nov 2015 20:11

He forgot to quote BRF analyst Gyan who stated that LCA is the world's best, all imports should be canceled and only LCA and it's follow on AMCA should be ordered.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16408
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 13 Nov 2015 20:40

arthuro wrote:
India To Boost LCA Order; AF Questions Its Capabilities


What is the purpose of this post?

The nation needs such efforts, which are bound to have failure points.







Known bugs.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18665
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Nov 2015 21:12

>>What is the purpose of this post?

For a Rafale fan to hardsell it whilst constantly disparaging all alternatives which may reduce its importance in the IAF numbers game. :wink:

Meanwhile Tejas's appearance plus things like the S-400 (if it happens), plus the Su-30 serviceability agreements with SMEs in India making more items may & more Su-30s, may reduce the clamor in AHQ for the Rafale as well...

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3457
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby kit » 13 Nov 2015 21:35

OT but more Rafales look very unlikely ..more super sukhois , AESA equipped LCA and the S400 to bridge the western front neatly wraps up everything else !

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 18 Nov 2015 02:57

Here is another conclusion that struggles with so many unfounded evidence and further blames it on DRDO/LCA for the Mig Coffins.

#BlameLCAForMigCoffinsRedux
http://thediplomat.com/2015/11/the-huma ... a-program/
The Human Cost of India’s LCA Program
The troubled development of the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft has had dire consequences for Indian pilots


The sheer nonsense headlines these idiots can come up with has no limits. OMG!

mentioning here to just highlight, we need a thread and a strong gov/public commission established to check such reporting and nonsensical writing without any logic.

member_29172
BRFite
Posts: 375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_29172 » 18 Nov 2015 03:09

The Human cost, The animal cost, The petrol cost, The diesel cost... India is doomed onlee unless it buys 300 imported planes with upfront cash payment (and I, the enlighted author, get my cut from the deal for being a good pet :))

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_22539 » 18 Nov 2015 05:06

Alka_P wrote:good pet :))


You mean whore right?

Bhurishrava
BRFite
Posts: 477
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Bhurishrava » 18 Nov 2015 08:50

Who is this chutiy@ Jayant Singh anyway. I couldnt write a poorer article than this one if I tried.

http://thediplomat.com/2015/11/the-huma ... a-program/
The Human Cost of India’s LCA Program
The troubled development of the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft has had dire consequences for Indian pilots


Ten minutes of my life wasted reading rehashed nonsense by this idiot. Insult to the intellect of people here.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9556
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Yagnasri » 18 Nov 2015 09:03

I do not agree. These fellows are not idiots. They are paid and doing their job. The fact that they are doing a bad job is indicative of the fact that LCA even in Mk1 version is good. It may not be F22 ( which none of us seen in real combat) but it is better than most of the things greens and reds got.


srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 18 Nov 2015 09:31

^^^

For 120 units, you want a second production line?

nits
BRFite
Posts: 993
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby nits » 18 Nov 2015 11:21

Gurus; with no new order for Sukhois; how big will be the effort to convert its prod line to build LCA once all planned sukhois are built... at least the basic infra will be ready to use ? thoughts ?

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9556
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Yagnasri » 18 Nov 2015 11:27

Had not HAL asked for some 2500 Cr for a production line of 25 earlier?

Why not delink the production facilities of HAL from HAL and make a new company say HAL Tejas Ltd and let it produce and service Tejas.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 18 Nov 2015 12:13

Yagnasri wrote:Had not HAL asked for some 2500 Cr for a production line of 25 earlier?

Why not delink the production facilities of HAL from HAL and make a new company say HAL Tejas Ltd and let it produce and service Tejas.


This problem is not HAL-centric.

Scaling production is not an overnight job. First, you have to build a few to standards by getting all your supply-chain with hundreds of SMEs in order. You have to get the quality right. Once that is done, then production can be scaled up exponentially. From order (frozen design) to first lot delivery takes between 24 to 36 months. That includes time for setting up infrastructure, like floor space, tooling/jigs and training manpower, to selecting Tier 1-3 SMEs/suppliers/manufactures, to obtaining raw materials to fabrication of individual parts and components before all of them reach production floor at regular Just-In-Time (JIT) intervals for final assembly. Then flight tests before handover.

The LCA IOC-2 production commenced after Dec. 20, 2013. As per schedule, the first lot delivery of 4-5 production standard units are expected by mid-2016 (which is within that 24-36 months stipulated time frame). From there, the production will increase to 8 and then to 16 within a span of 2 to 3 years. After that, it depends on the total volume order to account for the numbers/year that returns the best ROI. Main thing after this point is to keep the production lines humming along with orders (with at least 36 months of advance notice to avoid any gaps in production).
Last edited by srai on 18 Nov 2015 12:52, edited 2 times in total.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 18 Nov 2015 12:29

nits wrote:... with no new order for Sukhois; how big will be the effort to convert its prod line to build LCA once all planned sukhois are built... at least the basic infra will be ready to use ? thoughts ?


Jigs and tooling are different. Besides, you also have to scale up your supply-chain with hundreds of SMEs. Then, you also need volume orders unless you expect HAL (or other production agencies public/private) to make LCAs at a loss or at high cost to the user. Setting up production infrastructure is not cheap and takes time. You can't finalize your order today and expect delivery by tomorrow. There is a lead time involved and return-on-investment (ROI) is at play.

IMO, new orders need to be made for Su-30MKIs to keep the production lines going a bit longer. I don't understand the rationale for closing that line down when there are no alternatives (other than imports outright). The IAF urgently needs new planes to make up for its depleting squadron numbers. There are two production lines now in India and these Su-30MKI and LCA lines need to be utilized. Su-30MKI line produces between 12-16 units/year while the LCA will be doing similar by 2018/19. That is equivalent to two squadrons a year from 2019/20 onward.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby nirav » 18 Nov 2015 14:43



srai wrote:^^^

For 120 units, you want a second production line?



DM had indicated that the numbers wont stop at 120.

HALs production @ 12-16/year and another line churning out 8-12/year gives MoD and IAF space to order much more.

Current DM, Shri. Manohar Parrikar in his short tenure of barely a year has shown that hes on his way of being billed as the "Best defence minister" of Free India.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 18 Nov 2015 18:03

The bigger clout-system out there (spread throughout our setup) is heavily focused on creating problems for LCA. DRDO and Team LCA needs a better public media controller person/office. Only information from such offices are valid and true.

come what may, they might even create quota system for Firang Companies! Let's call it NATO block command of IAF [other sub commands here], Russian command, yadi yada..

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 18 Nov 2015 18:59

nirav wrote:


srai wrote:^^^

For 120 units, you want a second production line?



DM had indicated that the numbers wont stop at 120.

HALs production @ 12-16/year and another line churning out 8-12/year gives MoD and IAF space to order much more.

Current DM, Shri. Manohar Parrikar in his short tenure of barely a year has shown that hes on his way of being billed as the "Best defence minister" of Free India.


It's not concrete until x numbers are signed in an order contract. There are no stated intent, let alone firm intent, from the IAF at this point in time other than those 120 units. When sufficient orders are placed then second/third/etc lines will come about. But until then no one is going to invest money on a second line or increase production rate beyond certain profitable levels.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby pragnya » 18 Nov 2015 19:55

srai wrote:It's not concrete until x numbers are signed in an order contract. There are no stated intent, let alone firm intent, from the IAF at this point in time other than those 120 units. When sufficient orders are placed then second/third/etc lines will come about. But until then no one is going to invest money on a second line or increase production rate beyond certain profitable levels.


srai,

first of all it is IDRW report which means you can safely ignore it.

however if it happens to be true, i would welcome it simply because IAF needs numbers ASAP. capacity building, creating a solid vendor base of SMEs is the need of the hour. ofc your point of confirmed orders is valid but 120 is not small any way you look at it. besides as the deliveries picks up there is also the likelihood of more being ordered. getting a solid foot in makes sure the more orders accrue and do not go foreign as there would be a political hue and cry (even if for brownie points) by the opposition. besides possible exports cannot be ruled out too as there is a solid market for single engined aircrafts from smaller countries. with LCC being low it would be a great bargain for many.

having two sets of trained manpower will only help in the long term as production processes are a technology in themselves. one set can takeover the naval LCA prod when the design is frozen and i am pretty certain IAF will latch on to a good number of squadrons of the same with modifications vis a vis landing gear, LEVCONS etc.. i hope ADA keeps these factors in mind.

again one prod run can rejig for AMCA prototypes, trials etc.. and both the lines can takeover the prod when design gets frozen.

in short it gives flexibility to plan both LCA and AMCA while not affecting the production run of the former.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby nirav » 18 Nov 2015 20:08

It's not concrete until x numbers are signed in an order contract. There are no stated intent, let alone firm intent, from the IAF at this point in time other than those 120 units. When sufficient orders are placed then second/third/etc lines will come about. But until then no one is going to invest money on a second line or increase production rate beyond certain profitable levels.


Correct if we believe the quoted report verbatim.

However talk of a second line and confirmed 120 orders were at behest of MoD not IAF.

I dont think we will have to wait for too long to find out details going by the rapid pace of decision making by MoD..

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18665
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 18 Nov 2015 20:43

>>first of all it is IDRW report which means you can safely ignore it.

he he
http://www.onewildandpreciouslife.ie/wp ... Laughs.jpg

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2015 21:37




IAF is doing its utmost to sabotage LCA. Please read article to see how many behaviors of concern you can identify in IAF brass.

http://fortune.com/2015/09/30/workplace ... -sabotage/

Parrikar needs to trim the brass. No doubt about it.

Left to themselves these guys will ensure IAF wont have any planes to fight a war.
Need to start with ACM Raha.

Or get MAF to give them a talk and tell how he had to fight in 1965 against all odds.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4327
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 19 Nov 2015 03:51

Second production line for 120 units: a Red Herring!

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2145
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 19 Nov 2015 05:18

These are the ****** that have mew sure that India remains a weak puppet in the hands of foreign suppliers and nations and have allowed Pukis to be a force. If the Marut had survived think where we could have been aircraft industry wise!
Last edited by ramana on 19 Nov 2015 21:34, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited ramana


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests