LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

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.
Locked
disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 8235
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by disha »

Just my two-cent-liners observations:

2000: Dhoti Shivering - will LCA fly?
2016: Dhoti Shivering - will Tejas SP-6 enter service by March' 2017?

In 16 years., Dhoti Shivering is constant. HAL/ADA/IAF/IN/MOD/Modi Sarkaar should definitely buck up their pace. We cannot have 16 years of constant dhoti shivering!
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Indranil »

I know nothing about the timelines. The assembly line is coming into its own now. So, time spent at each stage is not stabilized yet. They have struggled a lot in the last two years. But they have truly worked really hard on this for the last year. There is some laser focus on getting the the first and second line humming at full speed. And they have employed their best men at this too. So, I am optimistic that they will provide SP-8 or even 9 by year end. I can't say anything about the SP-5 from that picture, except that it does not look more than 40 days away from the paint shop.

Their marketing guys have to work harder. They have got to get them an order of one more FOC squadron to allow the pipelines to shift to Mk1A production without any slowdown. I also hope that they get the permission for the third line and design go-ahead for an F414 powered Mk1A (I will call this Mk1B). A simple nose-plug addition to compensate for the heavier engine at the back will also provide the necessary space for an IRST, internal self-protection suite and may be even a retractable IFR probe. If there is an order of 108 more Mk1Bs to be produced from 2024-28.

We should accept a few facts.

1. India needs to get to 42 squadrons by 2028-30. By then we should have consolidated to the LCAs+Su-30s+Rafales. Since we will soon have ~15 squadrons of Su-30, that leaves us ~27 squadrons of LCA + Rafale. (By 2030, Mirages, JAguars and Mig-29s will all need to be replaced).
2. There are two aspects of acquiring these 27 squadrons by 2028: speed and price. We are speaking of an average of 2 squadrons per year. We also know that we can't afford a lot of medium fighters either. No. govt. is going to drastically increase our capital expenditure part significantly in the next decade.
3. F-16s and Gripens are not medium weight fighters. They are light-weight fighters and medium weight flying bricks.

If we put the above facts together, if we are going to get to 42 squadrons by 2028, we very likely looking at a structure of ~15 heavy, ~7 medium and ~20 light fighter squadrons. Of the 7 medium fighter squadrons, 2 are already Rafales. We should think of where to get affordable 100 more medium fighters. Therefore, license production is likely out of the picture. And if we are going to get ~350-400 LCAs, we have to find a way of increasing the production rate to 40-fighters-per-year by 2024.

Simultaneously, HAL has to be given the mandate of making FGFA serial production ready by 2025-26. ADA should be given the mandate to develop an ALCA (based on LCA +AMCA), and AMCA production ready with the help of a strategic partner and a private production partner by 2028-30. NAMCA will take care of IN's requirements.
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1769
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Khalsa »

Did anyone take two seconds to appreciate that the old Kiran space is being repurposed for the second assembly line.
And this seems to an entirely bottom layer driven intiative instead of top down. HAL fighting for effeciency and basically saying what Walt Disney said, build it and they will come.
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by nirav »

The only other 'medium' fighter would be the F18.
I really doubt IAF will go for the MiGs.

Think they've mostly done away with the MMRCA requirement after all.
With the solah coming in to complement the LCA, the light and the heavy squadrons requirement will be adequate.

Who knows, we just may see a follow on order for the Rafale in the years to come.
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4024
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by deejay »

Indranil wrote:I know nothing about the timelines. The assembly line is coming into its own now. So, time spent at each stage is not stabilized yet. They have struggled a lot in the last two years. But they have truly worked really hard on this for the last year. There is some laser focus on getting the the first and second line humming at full speed. And they have employed their best men at this too. So, I am optimistic that they will provide SP-8 or even 9 by year end. I can't say anything about the SP-5 from that picture, except that it does not look more than 40 days away from the paint shop.

Their marketing guys have to work harder. They have got to get them an order of one more FOC squadron to allow the pipelines to shift to Mk1A production without any slowdown. I also hope that they get the permission for the third line and design go-ahead for an F414 powered Mk1A (I will call this Mk1B). A simple nose-plug addition to compensate for the heavier engine at the back will also provide the necessary space for an IRST, internal self-protection suite and may be even a retractable IFR probe. If there is an order of 108 more Mk1Bs to be produced from 2024-28.

We should accept a few facts.

1. India needs to get to 42 squadrons by 2028-30. By then we should have consolidated to the LCAs+Su-30s+Rafales. Since we will soon have ~15 squadrons of Su-30, that leaves us ~27 squadrons of LCA + Rafale. (By 2030, Mirages, JAguars and Mig-29s will all need to be replaced).
2. There are two aspects of acquiring these 27 squadrons by 2028: speed and price. We are speaking of an average of 2 squadrons per year. We also know that we can't afford a lot of medium fighters either. No. govt. is going to drastically increase our capital expenditure part significantly in the next decade.
3. F-16s and Gripens are not medium weight fighters. They are light-weight fighters and medium weight flying bricks.

If we put the above facts together, if we are going to get to 42 squadrons by 2028, we very likely looking at a structure of ~15 heavy, ~7 medium and ~20 light fighter squadrons. Of the 7 medium fighter squadrons, 2 are already Rafales. We should think of where to get affordable 100 more medium fighters. Therefore, license production is likely out of the picture. And if we are going to get ~350-400 LCAs, we have to find a way of increasing the production rate to 40-fighters-per-year by 2024.

Simultaneously, HAL has to be given the mandate of making FGFA serial production ready by 2025-26. ADA should be given the mandate to develop an ALCA (based on LCA +AMCA), and AMCA production ready with the help of a strategic partner and a private production partner by 2028-30. NAMCA will take care of IN's requirements.
Indranil, great post.

Still some dissent - the massive increase in cost of fighters with technology infusion, I do not see how IAF and other forces will be able to keep large number of fighter squadrons in future. 42 Sqn Air Force is slowly becoming a Shangri La because it is not just the Capex for the fighters but OpEx for 42 Sqns too. More so with a strong Fighter Arm that IN is working on procuring. We must also remember the increasing number of UAV and shortly UCAV sqns.

100+ fighters with the IN along with 42 Sqn fighter force with IAF may be out of reach for India since whether we like it or not, our overall defence spend is significant and at a high 2.2% of GDP. It will go down further to close to 2% and possibly stabilize around that.

I see IAF and other air forces developing omni / multi role forces with less and less emphasis on dedicated fighters or strike aircraft. This is where the Mig 29s and Jaguars will (IMO) be replaced by LCA as the option which is affordable, mostly in house and has low OpEx to get as close to 42 Sqns as possible. If the IAF insists on imported high cost fighters, then we will probably not exceed 35 Sqns.

Also, I don't see why we are working on a 2027-28 time frame for 42 Sqn IAF. If we are surviving with 33 Sqn today (and the threat environment is high now), I am sure <42 won't be an issue even in 2027.

JMT.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Neshant »

Most important role of the LCA will ultimately be not for war but for kick-starting the domestic aerospace R&D sector.

Its total wastage of money buying a single engine plane from overseas which will bring the country NONE of those benefits, only a large bill.

Deploy the LCA whatever its configuration and keep building its private sector supply chain.

This is THE pivotal project where Indian aerospace R&D either takes off or goes down the toilet.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Philip »

http://www.defencenews.in/article/HAL-s ... ers-250247
HAL setting up second production line for LCA Tejas to boost numbers

Thursday, February 02, 2017
By: Mathrubhumi

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) has set up a second line for the series production of Tejas. The new line has come up at Aircraft Division in December 2016, with the facility now being equipped with full-fledged assembly jigs.

Currently Tejas SP-5 is being integrated here, while SP-4 already moved to the final stages of systems checking at the LCA Division.

HAL has converted the erstwhile Kiran hangar to set up this additional production line.


The second line when fully operational can produce three aircraft per year. HAL Chairman T Suvarna Raju told Mathrubhumi that his team is committed to delivering the remaining series production Tejas platforms without any delays.

“We had our share of concerns and all that has been put behind now. We had adopted all modern production philosophies to roll out a world class fighter. The feedback from the user has been encouraging. You will see SP-4 and SP-5 flying soon,” says Raju.

The additional facility has been set up notwithstanding the approval from Ministry of Defence for another full-fledged Tejas production line. This is to augment the Tejas production so that the Indian Air Force could strengthen the No 45 Squadron.

HAL awaits the crucial Cabinet Committee on Security nod for the third Tejas production line. Around 30,000 sq meters of HAL land has been identified near Nekkundi for setting up structural assembly hangar, process shop and sheet metal shop, among others.

During a recent visit to Tejas facilities, V Sridharan, ED of LCA Division, gave an update on the series of new initiatives taken by HAL.

“We have established a new tarmac for the No 45 Squadron for day and night operations. A second dedicated drop tank test rig also has come up now, in addition to a new storage area space as well,” says Sridharan.

He said during the outstation detachment at AFS Thanjavur recently, SP-1 and SP-2 flew seven sorties in a single day.

As reported earlier, a 2400 sqm LCA Final Assembly hangar with annexe building has already been established. Also, a state-of-the-art painting facility is operational now.

“This is the first of its kind in the country. It has a wet type downdraft paint booth facility,
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by vina »

HAL has to be given the mandate of making FGFA serial production ready by 2025-26
This Russian PAKFA derivative / FGFA whatever seems like a massive still born boondoggle. What the Russians have flying is a prototype. I really don't take it seriously unless it has a true 5th gen engine.

SHOW ME THE ENGINE. Until that happens, it is a paper plane. The Russians simply don't have the materials expertise and the R&D investments in that area in the past 25 years to get there. The west was 20 years ahead of the Russians in engines. That gap has remained and not closed. I doubt the ability of the Russians to make a true 5th Gen engine.

It is as of now a "show" plane like the Chinese J-XX ding dongs. Okay for a strike role . But really not a true fighter.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Cain Marko »

Wrt article posted by comrade philip sir......new line has max capacity of 3 per year? Sounds a bit too less no?
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by JayS »

Cain Marko wrote:Wrt article posted by comrade philip sir......new line has max capacity of 3 per year? Sounds a bit too less no?
Its complimentary to existing line which was suppose to produce 8/yr eventually. But HAL went ahead and put up additional jigs to accelerate the process. Its technically still the first line - extension of it, if ypu will. 2nd line is awaiting approval which will enable HAL to ramp up to 16/ yr.

Thos complimentary line is a welcome proactive step from HAL.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Katare »

Russian economy just doesn't have enough depth to create a true 5th generation aircraft by itself. I personally think that today and in near future, no one except USofA has the capability and will to develop a 5th and 6th generation aircrafts. China may get there in next 15 years but until than unkil is the only game in the town. Except Russia (weak and small economy) and China (technologically backward) no other country is even thinking about making an indigenous 5th or 6th gen aircrafts.
You need a budget of at least $200 Billion to develop, manufacture and field a 5th gen aircraft in economically feasible numbers.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Cybaru »

Cain Marko wrote:Wrt article posted by comrade philip sir......new line has max capacity of 3 per year? Sounds a bit too less no?
it's an extra three that weren't there in the earlier lineup. All extras welcome!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by NRao »

no other country is even thinking about making an indigenous 5th or 6th gen aircrafts.
Japan
South Korea
And just recently Turkey + the UK.

The remaining are getting the F-35 (12, including the above 4).

But, point taken.
2nd line is awaiting approval which will enable HAL to ramp up to 16/ yr.
Is 16 as high as it gets? Too bad if that is the case. Would like 30, with exports in the mix, after 60-80.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Cybaru »

16 on single line. I believe the secondary line adds an extra 3/4 in number to the 16.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by JayS »

NRao wrote:
2nd line is awaiting approval which will enable HAL to ramp up to 16/ yr.
Is 16 as high as it gets? Too bad if that is the case. Would like 30, with exports in the mix, after 60-80.
When MoD is seating on the proposal of that 2nd line itself for more than a year now, what can anybody do...?? What hope do we see for further extension then..?? Let's say HAL is totally incompetent to ramp up LCA production beyond 16/yr and its imperative that we must screwdriver some foren maal, what on earth is stopping GOI to sanction even this 16/yr capacity..?? Its beyond me to understand why HAL is not being mandated to increase capacity when everyone is saying how we need all those aircrafts like tomorrow. All our alacrity is only reserved for imports. No one else to be blamed but the GOI for this. They hold all the cards, but can't sort the mess. They can increase orders, they can increase price per unit, they can allow HAL to absorb losses in amortizing higher capacity over low orders. There are n number of ways to make sure higher production rate in coming years. Surely the production rate won't be increasing by simply seating over proposals for years.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by NRao »

^^^^^

Thanks.

15-20 years ago they had ample time, but no money. Today they can find the funds, but no time.

They need to pick one single engine machine and chase it to perfection ASAP. Time is of utmost essence IMHO.

I think I will do some basic research on the 1A and II.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Philip »

We're the world's best manufacturers of "tech demonstrators" what?! Glorious production rate of 3/yr.What is MP doing.He should be roasting the b*lls of the ADA/HAL CMen and project heads in the foundry! If this is the best that HAL can manage,there's no point in even an academic interest in a "second line" of a firang bird.
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by nirav »

Philip Saar it's a staggered rate of production to deliver the initial 40.The schedule is completion of delivery in 19-20.HAL is on track.

I believe that's the time needed for having a seamless shift from production of current version to MK1A.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by tsarkar »

Austin wrote:https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... /[quote]If the upgrade goes forward, the fleet will get ...... an AESA radar
[/quote]
If only the Jaguar, Tejas and Su-30 AESA requirements were combined and smartly negotiated for real 100% ToT and 100% local manufacture of atleast 58 + 83 + 268 units instead of stupid piecemeal RFPs...when will we learn to think strategically instead of bureaucratically?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Cybaru wrote:
Marten wrote: PS: I think we have a Swedish shock coming soon.
NOOOooooooo.... Seriously? Chaiwallah?
Marten, please tell me no. Please not Paper NG.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Rakesh »

HAL sets up second Tejas production line
http://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/ind ... -1.1700394
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Rakesh »

Here's the brand new tarmac ready for No 45 Flying Daggers Squadron at LCA Division capable of night ops...
https://twitter.com/writetake/status/827127567295475712

A larger sized picture from the link above....too bad it was taken at night...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3qLpjmUoAIqav0.jpg:large
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Cain Marko »

I'm so desperately hoping that iaf orders at least another 40 deliverable by 2022 at foc.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by NRao »

Cain Marko wrote:I'm so desperately hoping that iaf orders at least another 40 deliverable by 2022 at foc.
I did a quick search:

1s by 2018-19.

1As Start 2021-22 and delivered by by 2025-28 (Raha) (will find url). Parrikar said, in Aug, that no consultancy on this machine

2s. One article claims that it is curtains (not going to cite it here). Another says OC in 2022. Raha says production in 2025. Another says Parrikar said that he will visit the topic in 2025 or so.

So, total stands around 120 right now. But, there are articles claiming 300-400!!!
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Indranil »

Philip saab,

Somebody has to have some serious restrictions to set up an assembly line producing three aircrafts per year. So please try to find out the reasons or understand that there might have been an error in reporting.

Just commenting "put the balls on fire" is the laziest approach which does not need any effort.
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Avarachan »

@Indranil, do you know (and can you say) what the Tejas's inboard pylons are rated for? If they can carry 1500 kg's, that means that the Tejas will be able to carry 2 of the BrahMos NG's. Wow.

I suspect that it'll be able to ... The Gripen C can carry 2 of the Taurus KEPD 350's, and they weigh 1400 kg's each.

Image

That would mean a lot for the Tejas's export prospects ... India would then be able to offer customers, along with its own lightweight fighter, a state-of-the-art precision-strike missile (which is both anti-ship and land-attack). Wow.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Indranil »

1200 kgs.

Even when heavy fighters fly with such heavy cruise missiles, their flight is severely restrictions. If you use a light fighter do so, you must be really desperate. You are putting the plane, crew and the missiles to in dire risk to gain ~20% additional range compared to the ground launched versions of these long range cruise missiles. All airforces who can employ such cruise missiles, also employ heavy fighters. The work of the heavy weights should be left to the heavy weights.

For light weight fighters, lighter (~600kg, ~350 km range) cruise missiles make more sense.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by NRao »

Tejas's export prospects
Of Tejas and the Brahmos. That would indeed be a home run for exports.

The missile Russia needs to sign off. Not sure, but, I would think the US for the aircraft. If by then they can mate the Kaveri, that would be certainty.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Vivek K »

So make in India is now a whisper!!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by NRao »

I think it is TBD.

India herself has to nail down details on the partner model (May-ish?), THEN select a partner. Supposed to occur by the end of this year.

On the US side, the Obama admin had come to some understanding and internal agreements. I would imagine they would be up for a revisit.

For sure the engine and carrier efforts are important to India - they are the key. Rest are tethered to these two in one way or another.

I think we need to wait for a couple of months. I very much doubt Trump will reverse anything. And, if Modi can come to a beautiful trade deal, then the relationship should be good to go. make all these part of "trade" and things should work out.
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Avarachan »

Indranil wrote:1200 kgs.

Even when heavy fighters fly with such heavy cruise missiles, their flight is severely restrictions. If you use a light fighter do so, you must be really desperate. You are putting the plane, crew and the missiles to in dire risk to gain ~20% additional range compared to the ground launched versions of these long range cruise missiles. All airforces who can employ such cruise missiles, also employ heavy fighters. The work of the heavy weights should be left to the heavy weights.

For light weight fighters, lighter (~600kg, ~350 km range) cruise missiles make more sense.
Oh, OK ... Thanks for letting me know.

Over the years, I've gotten the sense that Saab is desperate to make the Gripen appear more capable than it actually is ... I suppose the KEPD 350 with the Gripen should be seen in that light.
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Avarachan »

@Indranil, I have another question then. The Tejas is often photographed with 2 1200-liter fuel tanks. My guess is that those loaded tanks weigh about 1000 kg each ... Why does the Tejas fly with them if heavy loads threaten flight safety?
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by shiv »

Avarachan wrote:The Tejas is often photographed with 2 1200-liter fuel tanks. My guess is that those loaded tanks weigh about 1000 kg each ... Why does the Tejas fly with them if heavy loads threaten flight safety?
I think the days of having dedicated aircraft for dedicated roles is all but gone. You use what you have. If you have only Gripen - you use Gripen. If you have only LCA and you use LCA. Risk is always there
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Indranil »

Avarachan wrote:@Indranil, I have another question then. The Tejas is often photographed with 2 1200-liter fuel tanks. My guess is that those loaded tanks weigh about 1000 kg each ... Why does the Tejas fly with them if heavy loads threaten flight safety?
When the tanks are full, there are restrictions on the LCA, as in any other aircraft. That is why the fuel from the drop tanks is used up first. If challenged by an adversary, even these empty tanks (weight about 100kgs) will also be dropped.
ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by ArmenT »

Avarachan wrote:@Indranil, I have another question then. The Tejas is often photographed with 2 1200-liter fuel tanks. My guess is that those loaded tanks weigh about 1000 kg each ... Why does the Tejas fly with them if heavy loads threaten flight safety?
One reason: increased range. It is a fact that any aircraft with drop tanks (not just the LCA) cannot fly with the same agility that it has without drop tanks. However it is not necessary to perform fancy maneuvers all the way to the destination, just the ability to fly level is enough. If it becomes necessary to dogfight, the drop tanks can be jettisoned to increase agility.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Cybaru »

Indranil wrote:Philip saab,

Somebody has to have some serious restrictions to set up an assembly line producing three aircrafts per year. So please try to find out the reasons or understand that there might have been an error in reporting.

Just commenting "put the balls on fire" is the laziest approach which does not need any effort.
Sorry Philip, you gotta be blowing here vs toasting/roasting. Hal's own initiative is increasing the number by 3/4 to whatever the primary line is producing. Neither iaf nor mod paid for the extra secondary line from the news description!
Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Bala Vignesh »

Cybaru wrote: Sorry Philip, you gotta be blowing here vs toasting/roasting. Hal's own initiative is increasing the number by 3/4 to whatever the primary line is producing. Neither iaf nor mod paid for the extra secondary line from the news description!
Couldn't agree with you more on this.. Looks like HAL is prepping itself to handle(slightly) higher production rates, using internal resources , in the event the approval for the second line is delayed/denied.
ranjan.rao
BRFite
Posts: 520
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by ranjan.rao »

Cybaru wrote:
Indranil wrote:Philip saab,

Somebody has to have some serious restrictions to set up an assembly line producing three aircrafts per year. So please try to find out the reasons or understand that there might have been an error in reporting.

Just commenting "put the balls on fire" is the laziest approach which does not need any effort.
Sorry Philip, you gotta be blowing here vs toasting/roasting. Hal's own initiative is increasing the number by 3/4 to whatever the primary line is producing. Neither iaf nor mod paid for the extra secondary line from the news description!
For argument's sake even if they paid, the very fact that they are trying hard to ramp up production means something , right now every single tejas is welcome, and the point that they are finding efficiency in a complex system when media is running them down
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: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Marten »

Here is a theory that is probably uneducated and laughable. Please indulge me for a minute:
Space for expanding the Final assembly areas is limited. Probably fuselage box and other components other than wings can be assembled separately and then brought to final assembly. This might save space and time (different teams focusing on tasks), and help avoid delays related to space. Any way you look at it, the fact that the Tejas division is scrapping about to find ways to do things better is in itself admirable. More power to them. Folks who wax eloquent about Hawk assembly should also keep in mind Sreedharan Venugopal is managing LCA Tejas division! Cannot emphasize how important the next three years are for India's defence manufacturing capabilities.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Post by Indranil »

Okay. There are two Tejas assembly in HAL, one by the overhaul division and one by the LCA production division. For example, SP5 comes off former and SP4 comes off the latter line in close succession. The rate determining stage in both the pipelines is the equipping phase. It is envisioned that by 2018, this stage will take 45 days per plane. That would give an overall production rate of 16 aircraft per year.

I think the reporter got confused. By this year-end, each of these lines would be manufacturing 3 aircraft per year, and we should be seeing SP8/SP9 flying by yearend.
Locked