Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
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 » 09 Oct 2016 15:31

We (IAF alone) need 200 plus in the next five years or at most a decade. I would start with that figure and not worry about thousands. Cars are made in hundreds of thousands or millions. Most fighters are made in 100s - a few hit thousands

The problem is NOT capacity constraints or assembly line constraints or this and that. Those can be fixed easily. It just takes a mindset to de-bottlneck the production line and the supply chain and you can enhance capacity .

The key constraint is the IAF mindset. They simply have NEVER inducted a fighter or anything and gone through block modernization to get to full capability. The IAF model is to get fully developed fighter and then have it license produced and "indigenise" as much as possible.

This results in an LCA kind of development impasse, where orders come in trickle, where you cant get flying hours and initial validation and feedback to debug and plug back into the development cycle, and then there is always a moving goal post. In short the IAF does not have a product strategy, and if they do , it is plainly idiotic.

This is NEVER the way , ANY aircraft is developed anywhere in the world, from the East to West, to either military or civil. The intial versions of F16 , F18, Gripen, Eurofigther, Rafale Mig 29, SU-27 , F35 etc started with A/B models , went through block upgrades and in service debugging etc, and future iterations rolled out.

Case in point F35, the LOW RATE INTIAL PRODUCTION of F35 has delivered a total of 162 airframes! The full production rate will be hit only in 2019 . The F35 is NOT YET fully qualified for service or in IAF parlance, doesnt have "FOC"! .

IAF got a fully developed Rafale (Close to 20 years after it first flew I think), similar timeline with Gripen and all the MRCA contenders, where the versions which duked it out was close to some 3 or 4 block upgrades from inital version.

Coming back to the Tejas , what we are deploying is the equivalent of a Gripen C/D and what they "claim" they want is the Gripen NG equivalent , and all this without deploying the initial versions of Tejas.

Like the global industry, the IAF could have ordered some Gripen A/B equivalent some 5 to 10 years ago, gone for a block upgrade to C/D equivalent by now in the new build and as a Midlife Upgrade, and then gone to a Gripen NG equivalent in 5 years from now!

But no, they will order a piddly amount of 40 airframces in C/D, then want a massive avionics upgrade equivalent to a Gripen NG for the next 80 (within 4 years), and then to shore up numbers, "import" an equivalent number of Gripen NG / F16 Blk 70 and call it "indigenous" eventually, becuase it was screwed together here in India.

saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 325
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby saumitra_j » 09 Oct 2016 16:07

indranilroy wrote:Only one of the two conditions can be true.
1. An ecosystem can be developed within India. If this is true, it can be done for the LCA as easily or with as much difficulty as an imported fighter.
2. An ecosystem cannot be developed within India. If this is true, we are back to screwdrivergiri.

The truth is 1. is true and necessary. But, it needs expenditure. The real question is will we as a nation throw away our bean counting mentality and pay the upfront cost of this necessary development.

Indranil, the money is obviously not the only problem for we are willing to import. Let us assume that that money is put into the lCA. Can we build it enough numbers and within the given time? I suspect one of the things we never get to speak about is the sheer lack of manpower required for the scaling - I suspect the GOI in all its wisdom and data points simply cannot produce enough men (both in Private as well as in PSU) to have two assembly lines for the Tejas. Bean counting, useless Babus etc are the easiest explanations that avoid us taking a look at a more fundamental problems that we simply do not have the right manpower to produce things in numbers - and given the constant conflict between operational needs, lack of money and the need for skill development, the decisions will always look less than optimum.

The second thing I want to emphasize is that it is much easier to produce things that are used only once (e.g. a missile) as opposed to anything reusable (like fighter aircrafts) because of the need to produce a supply chain which will last several decades. Unless we start producing civil aircrafts in meaningful numbers, having a mature aerospace industry (and that includes large number of 2nd and 3rd line vendors) large enough to support two lines for fighter aircraft does not look feasible. In light of this, all the pieces of the puzzle have to move together - whether it is engine development, or development of the MTA or Saras and we should not just look at the LCA. I suspect GOI's biggest challenge is that to balance all this, the decisions will always look short sighted. Not to forget the wasted decade of the UPA when a lot of these decisions could have been easily done, especially when large scale commercial orders for Boeings and Airbuses were given. We never ask for an offsets clause while buying commercial airliners even though we spend billions....and that to me was one of the greatest missed opportunity in last 20-30 years as far as the Indian aerospace industry is concerned.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4297
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 09 Oct 2016 18:03

IAF and the challenge of multiple platforms
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/574862/iaf-challenge-multiple-platforms.html
The assortment of different aircraft, radars, weaponry and communications systems were procured due to strategic compulsions and limited choices. The constraints of procurement from different international original equipment manufacturers were not dictated by the IAF’s requirements alone but also by the politico-strategic considerations. Needless to state that this mix of such platforms, from so many different sources, could well have been avoided, if our indigenous development had achieved the desired success. The IAF will have to face the challenge of multiple platforms in the medium term.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 921
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gyan » 09 Oct 2016 18:38

Around 500 F-35 were already in production, at some stage before IOC in August 2016 and around 1000-1500 will be at some stage of production before FOC

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 09 Oct 2016 20:42

^^ We should also sign firm contract for Tejas with time limits. Let ADA/HAL pay penalties if they do not deliver on promised dates. OTOH IAF has to decide upon priorities on capabilities and be ready for tranche based production. IAF could dictate retro-fit all/most functionalities for all jets for additional costs but project cannot be held hostage for each and every mile stone.

Even now I don't think GOI/IAF/HAL has signed contract for 80 MK1A so far.

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 605
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby yensoy » 09 Oct 2016 21:45

Gagan wrote:What one way hain ji?
Drop the phool, land in Afghanistan, refuel and fly back onlee.


You got it a little wrong. Take off from Afghanistan/Tajikistan, drop the phool, land in Pathankot/Hindon.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1818
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 09 Oct 2016 21:54

The fact of the matter is national security is a game to the corrupt procurement bosses. IAF should have ordered 200 LCAs in place of the Rafales and the new fighter selection.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Marten » 09 Oct 2016 22:40

Make in India-->Assemble in India-->Screw driver tech to India-->Screw India. This is the high level pattern being followed.

Whoever thought that HAL can make it is wrong. This is a case for Saab to make LCA IAF-mk 2 aka NG in India. And if you believe any Chairman who says his org cannot make more than 16 a year, you must set aside your less-intelligent doubts and thoughts because it really means we cannot scale up without further orders. And if you cannot haul up your own PSU, then it deserves to be shut down. This is what the 100% MII plan really was. A plan to wind up inefficient enterprise and allow more efficient MNCs to create jobs in India. IP and aviation sector growth be damned. Jai ho, win win for everyone. From PMO to CAM to Pilot to Jingo. Except Indian abilities in aviation. So what, right?

PS: But really, the IAF knows better so we dumb civvies must hoof it. OK Tyagi2 Sir... Will do.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 921
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gyan » 09 Oct 2016 22:51

LCA + Nirbhay mounted Phool will have range of 1500km to 4500km depending on which figures to believe.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34234
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 09 Oct 2016 23:03

Pariker and the CAS have been mentioning a second line of fighters for several months now. We were busy waiting to Rafale and did not take it seriously. Not it is out in the open - and guess what single engine. LOL

Tejas will go on at its own pace and then AMCA wil be given a chance

In the meantime a foreign company will be given the chance to set up a 100% foreign owned plant to make aircraft and supply to IAF with gradual increase in indigenization. Whatever needs import for quick induction will be imported. Phoren engineers. Local workers. Maybe local test pilots. Gated community. Delivery straight to Air Base and handholding of IAF technicians.

I don't know why people still talk about "transfer of engine tech". This cannot happen unless workers are taken to the lab/foundry of the OEM engine maker - given the exact formula of the alloys used and the exact process by which the alloy is formed. Also the workers are taught hands on the technique of final finishing. Even father's can't do this for their sons nowadays so forget transfer of tech

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 525
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby sankum » 09 Oct 2016 23:38

CAS is happy as RM is finally atuned to IAF views.

When RM said about one or two make in India fighters no one was able to comprehend that the two fighters in question are Rafale/Gripen and LCA will be limited to 120nos mk1/mk1a.

80nos more LCA can go through if one of the above make in india fighters does not make the cut.

The number of LCA will be limited to 120 nos or at most 200 nos.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
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 » 09 Oct 2016 23:40

I don't know why people still talk about "transfer of engine tech"

Yes. That is why this talk about we will expect full tech transfer etc stuff from Raha and Parikkar is baffling. What will they provide that we already don't have?

Composites --> We have it.
FCS/FBW --> We have it. Gripen doesnt, and they can't give us the american FCS
Avionics --> Yes. Airborne Radar , we dont have it. But the current Gripen E flies with a non Saab radar, which we have blacklisted. What can they give us there?
Weapons --> All the weapons of the Gripen are imported.

So there we are. All the key components of the Gripen are from outside (Radar, IR search and tracker, weapons, FCS, engine). The only thing that Gripen can offer us is a data link. We already have one. So really what can they offer us ?

That leaves us the only REAL target . That is the F16 or F35. We simply can't afford the F35, if we can't afford the Rafale. So via F16, we can possibly get access to American tech, that is getting phased out.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 525
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby sankum » 09 Oct 2016 23:47

Yes, If americans give us engine technology than they can have the lucarative make in India Fighter contract.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10765
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 10 Oct 2016 00:10

This thing being may be spinned any way, but the truth is that any new single engined fighter under make in india will undercut the LCA.
Plain and simple onlee!
5th gen tech is a different story.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 10 Oct 2016 00:13

shiv wrote: We (IAF alone) need 200 plus in the next five years or at most a decade. I would start with that figure and not worry about thousands. Cars are made in hundreds of thousands or millions. Most fighters are made in 100s - a few hit thousands

I presume you saw the video interview with the HAL MD who stated that in one year HAL can ramp up production to 8 aircraft a year and a year after that they can go 16 aircraft a year. The MD of HAL stated that they cannot ramp it up any higher.

If we take his word and assume that all goes well we will have
9 Tejas by 2019
25 by 2020
41 by 2021
57 by 2022

By then we would have our Air Force depleted by 12 MiG 21 squadrons leaving a 140 aircraft net depletion
By adding Rafales we still have a net depletion of 100+ aircraft below what we have today, let alone a future requirement of 45 squadrons


Shiv, its been sometime since I updated my numbers but from what I remember, IAF has to take care of the following turnover:

1. 3 x Mig-27ML squadrons (only 02 of 05 Mig-27 squadrons were updated) - As per one news item, 1 x Mig-27 squadron has already been number-plated. So, 02 more squadrons to go. Even the upgraded Mig-27UPG will need to be phased out by 2022-2023 time-frame.

2. Between 4-5 squadrons of Mig-21 (I think we've 1 x Mig-21bis and 3/4 Mig-21 M/MF).

3. 5/6 x Mig-21 Bison Squadrons - these will be last to go but here again, the upper timeline should be 2025.

--------------------------------------------------------------

So, over next 5 years (2016-2020) and 10 years (2016-2025) period, we need about 14-16 squadron worth of fighter a/c. And these are all single engine variety.

Had we got 126 MRCA and with 120 Tejas Mk1+Mk1A, we would have the solution to manage this turnover. However, even with best of effort, we'll not be able to bypass the short-fall in immediate future.

Lets look at what we're getting: 04 x Su-30MKI squadrons + 02 x Rafale + 6 x Tejas Mk1/Mk1A.

The above equation looks OK but there are two problems: (a) timeline for induction of Tejas (b) We'll still not reach 39 Squadron strength.

On top of it, we're aiming for 42 squadron IAF.

Between today and 2025, IAF needs 7-8 additional squadron worth of aircrafts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, here are the doubts that I have:

1. Why is the production capacity of Tejas Mk1A not being planned with increased output from word go? We know that Tejas Mk1A will become available in 2020-21 time-frame. Production capacity can be planned in advance.

2. More Rafale manufactured in India. Between Rafale and Tejas Mk1A, we balance the requirement.

3. First fighter to roll out of Indian production line will take 5 years minimum (negotiations+plant set-up+production). Almost in parallel to first flight of Tejas Mk1A and its production.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- Only reason for additional fighter line is that GOI is looking to add about 2 squadrons from foreign supplier till Indian plant starts rolling out the first plane.

- And GOI/MOD think we need a foreign partner to provide the deep knowledge to kick-start an aerospace environment in the country.

- For some reason, we're reluctant to expand the Tejas Mk1A production - this bit is most perplexing for me. Current RM made stakeholders meet and arrive at Tejas Mk1A solution. And it has everyone's backing. So, why not put all the weight behind it and expand its production line?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 10 Oct 2016 01:44

vina wrote:
I don't know why people still talk about "transfer of engine tech"

Yes. That is why this talk about we will expect full tech transfer etc stuff from Raha and Parikkar is baffling. What will they provide that we already don't have?

Composites --> We have it.
FCS/FBW --> We have it. Gripen doesnt, and they can't give us the american FCS
Avionics --> Yes. Airborne Radar , we dont have it. But the current Gripen E flies with a non Saab radar, which we have blacklisted. What can they give us there?
Weapons --> All the weapons of the Gripen are imported.


"people" that *asked* for engine techs were the "people" from the engine div (GTRE?) via the DTTI effort (along with the help requested for the air craft carrier) - thus forming the Jet Engine Joint Working Group (JET JWG).

The party line is that India requested ToT for high temp materials. Since DTTI is "joint design + develop" India requested to uprate the GE F-414 INS6 (jet engine made for the LCA MII) (from 90 kn to 110 kn?).

From open sources, this is NOT any form of "ToT", since DTTI, through which it was requested is only about joint design+develop (with GE).

The US has since agreed to release sensitive engine related techs, *only* if India selects one of the two F-teens for MII.

The latest news of RFI(?) for a single engine craft, for MII, leads me to believe that the F-16 will come, *therefore* no Gripen. It has to IF India wants the jet engine techs it requested.

That leaves us the only REAL target . That is the F16 or F35. We simply can't afford the F35, if we can't afford the Rafale. So via F16, we can possibly get access to American tech, that is getting phased out.


On the F-35, if it comes:
* It can be MII, but not in the pure sense of it. Even today *major* parts are made all over and for that reason alone an Indian F-35, MII, will have to get wings or something else from some other country already manufacturing it
* I will venture to say it will be the most cost effective machine (cost to capabilities)
.
.
.
* The *only* question I have is, is India ready for such a machine: both technology wise and mind set? As an example, we think of the Rafale as a "plane" and "support". The F-35 - to a much, much greater extent - has "support" embedded into the air craft. The air craft will tell you what is to be done, no need to test this and that.

On teh supply chain side major suppliers to the air craft are *already* - today - conducting tests on each and every part at a very granular level, in real-time and warehousing that info. So, they already know which part has gone into which plane, who manufactured it, test results, etc, etc, etc, etc. Are Indian industrial partners ready for such techs? Do they have the infrastructure to test each and every part, transfer that result to a warehouse, etc? I do not know, but I highly doubt they do.

The F-35 is not going to be an - yeah, we do not like the F-16 so let us see if they give us a F-35 plane.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 891
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby RKumar » 10 Oct 2016 02:01

It will be big shame, if F-16 or Gripen is inducted in IAF. We are ready to setup production line for new type but not for LCA. If numbers are any conern do keep adding the capacity 8 next year, 16 - 2 years, 24 - 3 years and 32 - 4 years down the line. Having large number of single type of aircraft, will ease the maintenance and upgrade. And cherry on top, it is Indian designed fighter for the Indian air force.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6082
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 10 Oct 2016 02:42

Saumitra, let me rephrase my question. The same people, the same industry, the same infrastructure has to be used to build the foreign fighter. Right? Then how is the challenge larger to produce LCAs only?

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1818
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 10 Oct 2016 02:54

Indranil - foreign fighter will come with bribes and Xbox one!! LCA comes with no bribes and a lota of water to wipe mafia's ass with. The difference is stark.

Mafia killed the Arjun and now we are seeing the death of the Tejas!
Last edited by Vivek K on 10 Oct 2016 07:14, edited 1 time in total.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10765
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 10 Oct 2016 04:29

Time for a new dhaga?

Who is Maria?

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1060
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 10 Oct 2016 05:47

^^^ Maria... generic name for Russian Tank Lobby

saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 325
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby saumitra_j » 10 Oct 2016 07:50

indranilroy wrote:Saumitra, let me rephrase my question. The same people, the same industry, the same infrastructure has to be used to build the foreign fighter. Right? Then how is the challenge larger to produce LCAs only?


Indranil, that is exactly what I am trying to say - the new imported fighter will NOT be produced by the same industry at least initially per my understanding. We simply do not have the man power or the capability to raise that man power in meaningful ways to meet IAF's operational needs in the limited time that we have before squadrons get number plated. Just think about it: A Su30 has over a million parts and even after all the tech transfer et al, how many Indian vendors can make those aerospace qualified parts? Lest we forget, despite having a very robust aerospace industry and access to a well oiled supply chain, France cannot fast track it's Rafale orders - it will still take them three years.

In one of my earlier posts, I had mentioned that a basic device such as a space qualified heat pipe required by ISRO had to be imported from Russia and ISRO is trying to grow a small vendor in Pune so that they can get that done locally. I think Indian manufacturing industry despite all the success in the automotive sector is no where close to where it is required to support two production lines for the Tejas, much as I would want it that way!My take is that the Tejas cannot be fast tracked, no matter what money we are willing to throw at it.

Part of the problem is that we have not used our commercial aircraft deals wisely, an offset clause there a few decades back would have done wonders! AFAIK, HAL only makes the doors for A320, we have sold them our Composite related software but nothing beyond that.

The way I look at this deal is:
1. Initially, it is to meet IAF's immediate operational needs, especially given the mid term challenges from Pakistan and China - which means full import a la Rafale
2. The deal will have suitable offsets clause, tech transfer etc to increase the vendor base for aerospace qualified parts using Make In India.
3. IAF will have to deal with multiple aircraft types, a bad situation operationally but given the reality of the country's dependence on imports, that is possibly lesser of the evil.
4. Tejas will come in the numbers as announced, may be be exported as well. Once the overall eco system is built, Tejas Mk2 and MCA will come from HAL in huge numbers.
5. MTA, Saras etc HAVE to succeed to create a robust civil market for Indian designed and manufactured aircrafts - otherwise sustaining this capability will be very difficult.
6. There could be a strategic angle to this deal as well including buying commercial influence, setting up long term academic relationships including some labs etc - to be honest that is an unknown and could be pure wishful thinking at this point.

PS: I have tweeted to MP asking him this question, don't expect a reply :) but mostly a short in the dark.....

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 10 Oct 2016 12:18

Post from the past:
Original link is dead but quoted text is there on BR.
viewtopic.php?p=443305#p443305

Shortage of manpower is another crippling factor. When the Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) project began on the drawing board, the team had more than 120 scientists looking after different aspects. However, when the plane was finally ready to fly, less than 25 scientists were there. Thanks to the boom in the information technology industry that required trained engineers and scientists.

K_Rohit
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 16 Feb 2009 19:11

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby K_Rohit » 10 Oct 2016 12:21

Did anyone else notice the pride of place given to Tejas (and other indigenous stuff) at the Air Force Day parade and events? It occupied the central spot in front of the dais? Astra, Brahmos, locally made radars...all on proud display.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1060
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 11 Oct 2016 01:34

^^^ Yes Indeed .....
Hopefully it was more than Lip Service

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 306
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ragupta » 11 Oct 2016 01:47

JayS wrote:Post from the past:
Original link is dead but quoted text is there on BR.
viewtopic.php?p=443305#p443305

Shortage of manpower is another crippling factor. When the Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) project began on the drawing board, the team had more than 120 scientists looking after different aspects. However, when the plane was finally ready to fly, less than 25 scientists were there. Thanks to the boom in the information technology industry that required trained engineers and scientists.


Fortunately India is past that. That is why it is also important to develop private industry.
All those scientist first love would have been aerospace, but the lure of pay made them change their mind.

Hope that it will not happen now or in near future.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6082
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 11 Oct 2016 02:56

K_Rohit wrote:Did anyone else notice the pride of place given to Tejas (and other indigenous stuff) at the Air Force Day parade and events? It occupied the central spot in front of the dais? Astra, Brahmos, locally made radars...all on proud display.

That is really commendable. IAF's official Twitter also has Tejas on their covers.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3349
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Oct 2016 03:14

@Vina^^"The US has since agreed to release sensitive engine related techs, *only* if India selects one of the two F-teens for MII."

You put your finger on it. That is the deal. That is the QPQ. The Gripen uses the GE F414 what does that incrementally get the US? OTOH, the F-16s and their supplier base play to the US Congress.You buy/build the air frame and buy the avionics, you get the engine tech and the ECOSYSTEM.

One thing we should not overlook is the Modi dispensation for creating manufacturing jobs. India spends a heck of lot of money on defense. They are trying to channel that into jobs rather than worry about ToT and indiginization. It coincides with MII.

Boeing is going to get first dibs on AMCA . That is the 'co-development' you hear about.

kittigadu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 52
Joined: 01 Sep 2008 08:02

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby kittigadu » 11 Oct 2016 08:46

The technology for high temperature nickel based alloys in the HPT and the latest CMC technology will never be shared with India. These are not shared even with the UK and France. For e.g., Safran and GE are partners in CFM, but there is strict separation even here, Ge the core and safran the rest. If the GOI believes that sensitive materials technology will be transferred, it is being led down the garden path.

India has enough talent to develop the alloys itself. Even CMC technology. Need money and focus and a decade.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2018
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 11 Oct 2016 09:56

If we have to choose teens, I would prefer going with FA-18F/G version, whatever they are willing to export. That brings capabilities that no other aircraft in our fleet has, especially the Grover version. I understand they will sell the crippled version, but even that might be light years ahead of the Rafale in those roles. It will also stabilize the power plant for the LCA and allow them to even setup a factory to assemble the F414 locally and may even work with us on more powerful version for our both the fleets. Such a move may even allow AMCA to have the upgraded F414-Upgraded version available in time for roll out. Plus it works for the Navy too. The line will get orders from both the IAF and IN making it a worthwhile investment. 120-150 planes for IAF and 60 odd for the Navy.

It is decent in A2A and very well primed for A2G and SEAD/DEAD roles. We have enough Air Superiority fighters. Need an all rounder especially one that is capable of dedicated SEAD/DEAD roles.
Last edited by Cybaru on 11 Oct 2016 10:06, edited 1 time in total.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4074
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Neshant » 11 Oct 2016 10:04

Unfortunately no amount of handing over money to foreign defense firms is going to develop aerospace engineering abilities of Indian scientists & engineers. It subsidizes the development of foreign aerospace R&D infrastructure and India pays for it.

The old "transfer of technology" meaningless buzzword is thrown around to get suckers to part with their $.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10765
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 11 Oct 2016 10:32

Isn't the FA-18 E/F/G too big for our carriers?
Are they compatible with a 40k carrier?

Ultimately massa hardware is part of an ecosystem, one can't buy one piece of it and get another piece from somewhere else and then try to build an ecosystem of our own.

IAF/IA/IN have to move to net centric ops, everything integrated in one big huge system. It becomes very difficult if u have 3rd gen, 4th and 4.5 gen systems, then from the west, east, indiginous (which are like a UN in themselves).
Logistics and cost must surely be an issue.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2018
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 11 Oct 2016 10:49

We will eventually move into a integrated system. There was so news that Boeing conducted simulations about FA-18 taking off with decent load from Vik.

Anyways, we are polluting our LCA thread! so perhaps we should move all these conversations to other make in India teen thread.

Schmidt
BRFite
Posts: 219
Joined: 19 Aug 2016 08:02

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Schmidt » 11 Oct 2016 10:53

RFI issued for MIG21 replacement


http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/f ... 202548.ece

The article completely avoids mentioning the Tejas as an existing alternative

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6082
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 12 Oct 2016 00:18

I would love to see GoI float a global RFP for: co-design with ADA a stealthy LCA Mk2, produce it with private players. Simple requirements:

1. Engine: GE-F414,
2. Modified rectangular air intakes,
3. Modified fuselage shaped for higher stealth,
4. Higher internal fuel load,
5. Canted twin tails,
6. Added points: Internal weapons carrying capability of 2 BVRs + 2 WVRs.

Detailed proposals due by 2020. Flying prototypes in 2023. Assured orders 200 aircrafts. LM, Dassault, Mig, Sukhoi and Northrop all have semi ready designs which they can adapt to the LCA.

Advantages:
1. Truly bring in technology which is currently not available in India. These can be used in AMCA, and the co-designers knows that. It is not just 200 planes, they will be the natural partners of AMCA.
2. Such a plane will have no parallels in 2025 except the KFX-E (if it comes to life). It will be great capabilities at low costs. Can be easily exported in numbers.
3. A stealth LCA with great engines and great weaponry in numbers will strike fear into the hearts of our enemies.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2016 00:40

You are asking for basically a whole new design with only name of LCA carried forward.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6082
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 12 Oct 2016 00:52

I am asking for reuse of the wings, LRUs, LGs, avionics, radar, weaponry, fuel systems. I am asking for re-design of the fuselage shape and radome (adding chines) and twin tail.

Coming up and testing a modified airframe around the same innards within 6-10 years is certainly possible. Look at what Boeing and Northrop are doing with their USAF trainer program.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 891
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby RKumar » 12 Oct 2016 02:12

Basically it is a new plane, why name it LCA. Call it SLCA and done with LCA saga. SLCA will take another 10-12 years, but what is the alternative for next 5 years? Why not build infrastracture which we need for LCA/SLCA.

We have crossed the threshold with induction of LCA, lets stick with it and create local MIC. With drivergiri, we are not going to get any where. Niether last 60 years of tot helped us nor will next 60 years.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Oct 2016 02:16

Certainly reuse of all those thing will reduce development cycle somewhat, but the changes you are asking for are extensive enough that it no more remains LCA.
- New bigger and more powerful engine means redesign of all the internal structures and mounts holding the engine. Recertification will be needed.
- Twin tail - where would you put it, you will have to provide for mount points with underlying support structure in the main aircraft structure. redesign of Wing internal structure needed to some extent if you cant put it on the fuselage itself.
- Redesigned fuselage, means all internal layout will be changed.
- New design of entire bulkhead structure inside the fuselage.
- Increase internal fuel + internal weapons bay means fatter fuselage.
- Extensive work on wing+fuselage needed. Wing cannot be seen in isolation on fighter like LCA. Change in fuselage means significant change in Aerodynamics and aircraft dynamics.

We can call it ALCA though. Another addition to the A*CA series. :mrgreen:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15925
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 12 Oct 2016 03:01

JayS wrote:We can call it ALCA though. Another addition to the A*CA series. :mrgreen:


Sorry taken :wink:

here wrote:IF at all, India should start a companion ALCA (advanced) and a naval AMCA efforts - patterned after the AMCA.


Made an arg that the "LCA" has come to its natural end in that thread.

My reasoning with AMCA based is that the AMCA is far more mature than the LCA and further along than we know it to be (IMHO).

Such a plane will have no parallels in 2025 except the KFX-E (if it comes to life)


I was under the impression that the KF-X program was a 4.5 or so gen effort. It was less than a F-35, but greater than a Rafale/Typhoon. No?

AMCA is expected to be greater than the FGFA. IF true, then it would be far better to derive a single engined analog from that machine. ?????


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 72 guests