LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Jun 2017 02:26

An awesome appraisal of the challenges facing the LCA development written in 2001 by Air Marshal M.S.D. Wollen(R)

http://www.tejas.gov.in/featured_articl ... ge_01.html

And very true.

I read this whenever I feel blue about the LCA

http://www.tejas.gov.in/featured_articl ... ge_01.html

What an achievement.

How the LCA was developed:

http://www.tejas.gov.in/featured_articl ... ge_01.html

Avtar Singh · Post by **Avtar Singh** » 21 Jun 2017 02:49

Reading bharat karnad always has me reaching for some rope.. but then I slap myself and get out of it
whatever comes it will not be the end of anything..
1000s of LCA under Make in India would be great, but if it was that easy everybody would be doing it

remember in the 90s how on these pages people dreamed of an Indian aeroplane flying. Well that is a great picture above and remember saab crashed 5 grippen before they got it to fly properly

numbers are needed and in the end girls and boys need their toys...
all this f16 antique nonsense..it is a great aeroplane;
HOTAS (sidestick is the only way to fly), reclined seat with a great bubble canopy.
I have seen great/hair raising antics with this machine and one only needs a few thousand feet agl to roll over and pull through

even if f16s, f18s more russian/french planes come I am sure their will be many more Indian machines also. Can never have too many and the future economy will facilitate them all.

There will never be any technology given to India but I dont think India needs that.. practise, practise, practise even if it is only handling screwdrivers is all good

As I said, building fighters and engines is not easy.. all these people have had a hundred years and major wars to hone their skills.
India was left as a corpse only 70 years ago. Some of these bloggers seem to be bereft of any perspective when they whinge on about India

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 21 Jun 2017 04:26

Great! Now that you've cleared all doubts, my mind is out at ease.

brvarsh · Post by **brvarsh** » 21 Jun 2017 04:40

F-Solah as one of the friends wrote it as is like a hot steam during cold. Its not going to cure the cold but it will ease the cough. At the end to really get it out what we need is an established, growing and competing LCA product line incorporating technologies, strategies, solutions learned from flying others. The goal should always be to have LCA-32 and LCA-64 variants in large numbers. Building Fighters at that capabilities is like trying to jump on a Horse while it is running, not easy but once we hold the leash it is much easier to ride.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 21 Jun 2017 05:01

ramana wrote:Rakesh, Since Chacha Nehru times, GOI was hopeful of having a UK/US supersonic plane manufactured in India.
Initially it was the English Electric Lightning and the F104 but when mfg clause came the vendors balked and the govts., also did not give permission.

Didn't they fulfill this dream by mfrg UK Jaguars, Ramana ji?

Also some are saying mfrg f16 will teach us production for Tejas and AMCA. Didn't we learn it by making Jaguars?

RuAg had offered in helping with production, HAL didn't even bother to reply.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 21 Jun 2017 05:21

We just don't have the money for imports of obsolete stuff anymore. More money will be allocated to PAKFA/Rafales. Lighter end will have to come from MORE LCA. Sign as many MOUs as they like. Its happened many a times in the past.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 21 Jun 2017 05:40

Avtar Singh wrote:and remember saab crashed 5 grippen before they got it to fly properly

Two Gripen prototypes crashed and not five. I am not nitpicking, but brings a different perspective.

Avtar Singh wrote:HOTAS (sidestick is the only way to fly)

Please tell that to the Israeli pilots who creamed the Syrian Air Force in both F-15s (which have a control stick in the centre) and F-16s. In the late 70s and early 80s, Israeli F-15s were credited with 54 kills against Syrian AF's MiG-21s, MiG-23s and MiG-25s. In the same period, Israeli F-16s downed 44 air-to-air kills against Syrian MiGs. The point I am trying to make is having a control stick in the centre is just as effective as having a control stick at the side. A well trained pilot is effective in both.

Avtar Singh wrote:reclined seat with a great bubble canopy.

Care to explain why the F-Solah's successor - the F-35 - does not have an unobstructed bubble canopy? How did the lack of one on the F-15 still manage to slaughter the Syrian AF?

Avtar Singh wrote:I have seen great/hair raising antics with this machine and one only needs a few thousand feet agl to roll over and pull through

For every hair raising antic that the F-16 can do at air shows, I will show you MiG-29s and Su-30MKIs that can do far better. Performance at air shows proves nothing.

Avtar Singh wrote:There will never be any technology given to India but I dont think India needs that.. practise, practise, practise even if it is only handling screwdrivers is all good

We have been practising screwdrivergiri since the 50s. What have we learned? What will we learn with F-Solah or Gripen production that is going to be any different? Going by statements from BRFites from the past, F-Solah parts are to be sourced from various suppliers and we will be just assembling them. Nothing is being made from the raw material stage.

So apart from an increased production schedule, what are we learning?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2017 06:19

1. This is my opinion
2. Talk of F-16 OT for this thread
3. F-16 assembly (if it occurs) will be about jobs for Indians

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jun 2017 07:21

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7263&start=3240#p2173043

darshhan wrote:The report is dated september 2016. And therein lies the answer. What steps has HAL taken to identify and mentor a private sector partner for producing LCA in the last 10 months. I seriously doubt if HAL would be interested in nurturing a competitor for its bread and butter business.

This is one of the reasons why Strategic Partnership model involving foreign techonology suppliers is being pursued to develop private sector 'cause PSUs wouldnt di the needful mentoring.

So you trust foreign entity like LM, Boeing, Saab or Dassault more than HAL in parting with its know-how.

In any case, to answer your question on what has HAL done in producing the LCA and involving/mentoring/ToTing private sector in the last two-years or so:

wing -> L&T (Coimbatore)
central fuselage -> VEM Technologies (Hyderabad)
rear fuselage -> Alpha Tocol (Bengaluru)
precision mechanical assemblies -> Alpa Tocol and BrahMos Aerospace (Thiruvananthapuram)
...

More on the way...

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jun 2017 08:50

Manish_Sharma wrote:
ramana wrote:Rakesh, Since Chacha Nehru times, GOI was hopeful of having a UK/US supersonic plane manufactured in India.
Initially it was the English Electric Lightning and the F104 but when mfg clause came the vendors balked and the govts., also did not give permission.
Didn't they fulfill this dream by mfrg UK Jaguars, Ramana ji?

Also some are saying mfrg f16 will teach us production for Tejas and AMCA. Didn't we learn it by making Jaguars?

...

It did the opposite ... killed off Indian aerospace!

Some HAL designs from 1960s/70s.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 21 Jun 2017 14:33

srai wrote:viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7263&start=3240#p2173043
darshhan wrote:The report is dated september 2016. And therein lies the answer. What steps has HAL taken to identify and mentor a private sector partner for producing LCA in the last 10 months. I seriously doubt if HAL would be interested in nurturing a competitor for its bread and butter business.

This is one of the reasons why Strategic Partnership model involving foreign techonology suppliers is being pursued to develop private sector 'cause PSUs wouldnt di the needful mentoring.

So you trust foreign entity like LM, Boeing, Saab or Dassault more than HAL in parting with its know-how.

In any case, to answer your question on what has HAL done in producing the LCA and involving/mentoring/ToTing private sector in the last two-years or so:

wing -> L&T (Coimbatore)

central fuselage -> VEM Technologies (Hyderabad)

rear fuselage -> Alpha Tocol (Bengaluru)

precision mechanical assemblies -> Alpa Tocol and BrahMos Aerospace (Thiruvananthapuram)

...
More on the way...

SRai, You did not understand my question. I will try once more. Why will HAL take the lead in creating its own competitor capable of producing combat aircraft?

The examples that you gave are vendors for HAL. They supply components and services to HAL. They are not competing with HAL for producing and selling aircraft.

amit · Post by **amit** » 21 Jun 2017 16:15

The roadblock in this perennial debate which generates so much blind passion is that the whole idea behind a "Make in India" aircraft programme like the one signed by the Tatas is IMO the problem of being blindsided to the fact that this program is not about acquiring technology to design an aircraft or about vital technologies that go into such an aircraft. Rather it's about acquiring expertise in production technology which allows for a seamless transition from an aircraft design into assembly line production.

Can gurus answer a question. Has HAL as of yet achieved the production tolerances in Tejas manufacture which would allow them to interchange a part from one piece of Tejas and put it into another piece of Tejas? If not, then how can we say that all we need is to give HAL more orders and money and hey presto, they'll set up an assembly line in the private sector? What will the private company do? Custom build every single piece of Tejas at the breakneck speed of 4 or 5 a year?

HAL will have to go through a difficult learning curve to be able to develop and streamline production systems and processes to make them worldclass, it will take time, something that the IAF does not have when considering its squadron strength. No amount of money is going to make this lead time shorter.

IMO what's being attempted here is to inject the knowhow of how to assembly produce a complex technological product like a fighter plane with the hope that this might lead to a good absorption of the technology, systems and processes. It is hoped that this will result in a pool of skilled workers with necessary knowledge in areas such a high precision welding etc.

After the Tejas experience, I don't think design is the major challenge for Indian defence industry, the challenge is the ability to quickly productionise the design. Also IMO, if it had been possible I would reckon that the GoI would have been happy if HAL signed the agreement for F16 production. However, I don't think the US would have agreed.

The sad fact remains that all the years of producing Russian aircraft has taught HAL zilch about world class production technology. Otherwise we wouldn't have seen such a snails pace in producing Tejas.

Remember the original MRCA contract was about making the planes in India save for 18 or so which would have been be acquired in a fly away condition. The idea was IMO, western plane with western production technology could have resulted in a real learning.

It's useful to have a look at the Chinese civil aviation sector and find out how they managed to build the Comac C919. Isn't it curious that the aircraft is strikingly similar to the Airbus 320 which it so happens the Airbus makes in China? I'm not saying that the Tatas or whoever, would be able to follow the same path and produce an F16 like plane but at least it's an effort on the part of the government to try to make this happen. I'd be happy if Tatas can follow on and make a trainer, it would be a start to a private sector military industrial complex.

If there is an assurance, and the GoI seems to have given that with the Tejas order, this won't kill the LCA then, I'm not too sure why there's this, IMO irrational fear that this deal will be an end to Tejas. If really the intention is to kill off Tejas do they need an excuse for that? Folks seem to forget what happened to the Arjun, arguably one of the best tanks in the world.

JMT and all other standard disclaimers.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jun 2017 16:59

darshhan wrote:
srai wrote:viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7263&start=3240#p2173043

So you trust foreign entity like LM, Boeing, Saab or Dassault more than HAL in parting with its know-how.

In any case, to answer your question on what has HAL done in producing the LCA and involving/mentoring/ToTing private sector in the last two-years or so:

wing -> L&T (Coimbatore)

central fuselage -> VEM Technologies (Hyderabad)

rear fuselage -> Alpha Tocol (Bengaluru)

precision mechanical assemblies -> Alpa Tocol and BrahMos Aerospace (Thiruvananthapuram)

...
More on the way...
SRai, You did not understand my question. I will try once more. Why will HAL take the lead in creating its own competitor capable of producing combat aircraft?

The examples that you gave are vendors for HAL. They supply components and services to HAL. They are not competing with HAL for producing and selling aircraft.

HAL is a public company owned by the GoI. With the current GoI wanting to establish another aerospace combat enterprise, HAL is following suit. It's not like HAL is losing business. They will still get their fair share of the production. Outsourcing (80% of LCA production/components) is one of steps it is undertaking. The old HAL would have done those in-house. In fact, the first few LCAs are mostly made in HAL but will increasingly be outsourced with only the final integration taking place there.

Besides, they are looking at becoming more of a "design" house and vertical integrator that can R&D new planes/helicopters and less of the old licensed screwdriver production entity. Case in point are the HTT-40 and LUH. They raised their own capital to R&D those since the user IAF/IA weren't interested and MoD/GoI didn't release development funds. They waited for approvals/official sanctions for a very long time, and with those not coming they raised capital and went ahead. Rather than spend more of their money increasing production facilities, they are looking to put their money on their own new projects (which may or may not get government funding). They were also involved with BAe on the combat Hawk JV sharing the costs with their own funds.

The new private entity for final assembly ("screwdriver-giri") would still be decades away from reaching this stage where it can undertake R&D of new planes/helicopters. So not really a competitor at this point in time.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 21 Jun 2017 18:18

"Blind passion", "fear" = this "labeling" seems to be speciality of American product supporters.

America sanctioned delayed Tejas, at time of Powhatan. They are not making any assurance that they won't do it again. Now every time anyone expresses that concern is labeled "fear".

I know a poster who always supports amrikan products fanatically was saying "if we must have rafale then just lease it till 2036 'cause after that rafale will be totally obsolete. Now the same poster is all support for non-obsoletable f16 till 2065

Now it's obvious that some posters always fight for just amerikan stuff whether Walmart, nuke stations or amrikan EMALS.

It's their right giving half hearted -already defeated arguments like by learning to mfr f16 we will learn how to make Tejas .....

But I think "Labeling" fear etc. to opposers is unfair.

Fine Chinese made c---- by first making 320 first.

But are we going to make a copy of f16 after .Mfrg it for 2 decades?

IsTejas similar to f16 in composites & design?

Will lm shift extra tools jigs for constructing Tejas to exact tolerances like f16?

Aren't. HAL mfrg western Jaguar? Didn't they learn western way of mfrg fighters.

There was a video posted here of HAL 's latest assembly line for Tejas by some Kannada Channel which showed laser equipment for night tolerance mfrg, it was later part of last year iirc.

Whether f16 or grippen or any other foreign single engine jet, ordering it would mean cutting off Tejas numbers.

I m reminded of Arjun vs tincan debate, always tincan supporters will say ".... Orders for more tincan s won't eat into Arjun numbers.

Now perennial amrikan product supporters are saying same for Tejas.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jun 2017 19:00

amit wrote:... Has HAL as of yet achieved the production tolerances in Tejas manufacture which would allow them to interchange a part from one piece of Tejas and put it into another piece of Tejas? If not, then how can we say that all we need is to give HAL more orders and money and hey presto, they'll set up an assembly line in the private sector? What will the private company do? Custom build every single piece of Tejas at the breakneck speed of 4 or 5 a year?

...

Please research before posting

Here's your answer: HAL to build 8, then 12, Tejas fighters each year

Sunday, 29 December 2013
...
The Tejas could be a game-changer. Firstly, HAL has played a major role both in designing the Tejas and in building prototypes for the flight-test programme. Secondly, HAL has brought a radically new approach to Tejas production, adopting global aerospace manufacturing standards and an unprecedented approach to quality control.

Walking around the Tejas assembly line, Sridharan explains that the sixteen Tejas prototypes HAL has built are each different from the other. As the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) incrementally refined and improved the fighter, each new prototype incorporated improvements and additions. The most recent prototype has a pressure refuelling system that lets the Tejas be topped up Formula One style, in just 8 minutes and then flown back into combat.

“As a result of all these changes, a panel from one Tejas would not fit another. Now we will implement absolute standardisation, with identical components, assemblies and panels,” explains Sridharan.

This is being done with laser scanners that ensure that a number of key points (called “locators”) on each aircraft being built is exactly where it should be. By measuring with the laser, it is ensured that the locator is within 80 microns, i.e. about one-tenth of a millimetre, of where it should be. These are international standards, used by companies like Boeing.

It is evident from the focus of the laser trackers teams that it is painstaking work. This standardisation, and coordinating the flow of Tejas systems and sub-systems to the assembly line constitutes what Sridharan describes as the process of “stabilising” the Tejas line.

...

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 21 Jun 2017 19:01

^^^As i said, we are expecting serum (F16 ) from Dr Erskine (US) to convert us (Steve Rogers) into captain America. The only difference being, Dr Erskine underneath the mask is Dr Zola.
We are better tightening the screws on HAL in one form or another invest the same amount of money on Tejas Mkn variants rather than F16 or Gripe-N. Enough of this gas. unless this brings something tangible in geopolitical terms, it is not worth it

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 21 Jun 2017 19:22

Rakesh wrote:You cannot mimic what LMT did in the 1980s - 30 F-Solahs a month - in the first year or two. As I have said before, this is not assembling your chacha's bicycle. This is a sophisticated piece of machinery that requires an advanced knowledge of aircraft manufacturing. Where are you going to find these people from? HAL is the only one that has any knowledge - even if you believe it is caveman like compared to Western standards - of aircraft manufacturing.

How many reading this thread can understand how to assemble a F-Solah? Actually better yet, let me rephrase that...how many engineers reading this can actually understand what their role is in assembling a 4+ gen fighter such as the F-Solah or the Gripen E - if you got the opportunity - from the very get go on the production line? I am not an engineer by profession, so that rules me out. Do you believe - as an engineer - you can be handed a screwdriver and say go assemble? Is it that easy? Their is a learning curve here.

If a decision is only expected by 2018, then land has to be sought to build the factory, then the factory has to be built, people have to be trained on how to assemble a 4+ generation fighter and only then can production start. And all of this ... will take time. But unfortunately for the IAF, time is not a luxury they have.

And this is only for Transfer of Production. There is NOT going to be any Transfer of Technology. LMT and the US is not entitled to give us anything and rightfully so. It is their product and they can do with it as they please. Don't jump on me for that...that is the reality.

By the way, as a side note...we also have an acute shortage of pilots. No point in assembling fighters at the rate of 30/month, if no one is there to fly it. What ACM Dhanoa said about playing cricket with 7 members, instead of 11, is equally true of the squadron strength as it is of the pilot strength.

I still believe and want LMT to win this competition. Nobody can do logistics like the Amreekis. I just don't want...to quote Bharat Karnad (the only thing I agree with him on)...the museum ready F-Solah. But my wishes do not matter. I am onlee Admiral Emeritus

Rakesh, I'm not sure what you mean by you want LM to win but not F-16 since the F-35 is not on offer. We've discussed the productionizing issue to death over the years.

There are two parts to a fighter aircraft development - the platform and its systems.

We've done a great job with systems, given the earlier work with Jaguar, Harrier, MiG-21 & Su-30.

Getting the platform right was a humongous task and finally we're really close to FoC. Frittering away national resources to build a production line for another fighter is a dis-service. Given that even F-16s will take atleast 3 years from contract signature to come, investing in expanding Tejas Mk1 FOC production line does make sense. Most parts - wings, rudder, empennage wont undergo major changes at FOC.

Internal LRU's do have leeway - we're constantly upgrading MiG-21/27/29, Jaguar, Mirage 2000 & Su-30 with newer LRU subsystems as old ones become obsolete.

I've always maintained that buying equipment like Type 1135.6 frigates & Ka-226 when better domestic options are available is a waste of resources. Companies like L&T and Pipavav invested in world class shipyards and close to financial collapse due to lack of orders. Pipavav was fortunately saved by Reliance that smartly won the US Navy 7th Fleet maintenance contract. Its a shame yards capable of maintaining US Navy ships dont get orders from our MoD.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jun 2017 19:24

ArjunPandit wrote:^^^As i said, we are expecting serum (F16 ) from Dr Erskine (US) to convert us (Steve Rogers) into captain America. The only difference being, Dr Erskine underneath the mask is Dr Zola.
We are better tightening the screws on HAL in one form or another invest the same amount of money on Tejas Mkn variants rather than F16 or Gripe-N. Enough of this gas. unless this brings something tangible in geopolitical terms, it is not worth it

Not just a serum ... they are trying to drown Steve R in vat full of it hoping something will latch on!

A more cost-efffective approach would be to hire few experts/consultants/companies that specialize in aerospace production to audit and help improve processes at various points. Note: They seem to be already doing it.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 21 Jun 2017 19:56

T Sarkar sir,

Completely agree. Scratching my head to understand these developments. One more point on f 16 - it's only advantage over Tejas is combat radius. And that's only about 200 km max I think. For the western sector given our geographic advantage all Pak targets are within hitting range of Tejas (350 km low high low no tanks 1.5 tonne munitions) from our bases. And we won't use Tejas against china anyway.

So don't see an op logic for 16 here.

geeth · Post by **geeth** » 21 Jun 2017 21:08

IF a decision is made on the purchase of F16, it is because Uncle has a firm grip on our nuts by way of F404 & F414 engines...No point barking up the wrong trees like HAL DRDO etc....till the time we master majority of tech necessary, someone or other will always keep sqeezing our nur nuts either for money or pleasure or both. So..stop wailing.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Jun 2017 21:12

[b]Akshay Kapoor[/b] wrote:T Sarkar sir,

Completely agree. Scratching my head to understand these developments. One more point on f 16 - it's only advantage over Tejas is combat radius. And that's only about 200 km max I think. For the western sector given our geographic advantage all Pak targets are within hitting range of Tejas (350 km low high low no tanks 1.5 tonne munitions) from our bases. And we won't use Tejas against china anyway.

So don't see an op logic for 16 here.

Maybe the real game changer would be to build a new factory for the LCA Mk1A onwards.

and let it be joint venture with Tata or Mahindra?

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 21 Jun 2017 21:47

Which is exactly what HAL wants too. They also want to farm off LCH production for the most part, if one goes by the article thay Sraiji had posted earlier

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 21 Jun 2017 22:10

tsarkar wrote: I've always maintained that buying equipment like Type 1135.6 frigates & Ka-226 when better domestic options are available is a waste of resources. Companies like L&T and Pipavav invested in world class shipyards and close to financial collapse due to lack of orders. Pipavav was fortunately saved by Reliance that smartly won the US Navy 7th Fleet maintenance contract. Its a shame yards capable of maintaining US Navy ships dont get orders from our MoD.

Couldn't agree with you more. The MOD is squandering resources and killing domestic MIC in buying the Type 1135.6 frigates & KA-226 when world class solutions are available domestically.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 21 Jun 2017 22:23

Actually I think I overestimated combat radius. Recheked Vivek Ahuja calculation and combat radius is about 200/250 km in that configuration but still good enough from all bases in WAC. And most in SWAC.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jun 2017 22:50

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Jun 2017 22:53

Akshay Kapoor wrote:Actually I think I overestimated combat radius. Recheked Vivek Ahuja calculation and combat radius is about 200/250 km in that configuration but still good enough from all bases in WAC. And most in SWAC.

No sir, you underestimated it. With fuel tanks the ferry range is 1700 kms and the combat radius is 500 km.The longest ferry flight that LCA LSPS have taken till now is from Bangalore to Gwalior.

chola · Post by **chola** » 21 Jun 2017 23:05

ramana wrote:Folks thanks for all the nice post but I find a few jarring.

For starters, chola please stop using profanities even if miss spelled to get away from the spell checker. The forum is read by many people from all walks and genders. So on this page go back and edit those out. And don't use them in future.

Others, No need for rants and whines let the facts speak for themselves.

Thanks.

My apologies, Saar. Forum no allow editing for some reason. Have gone native growing up around foul-mouthed gora (and goris.)

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 21 Jun 2017 23:19

Indranil I said without tanks , 1.5 tonne and low hi low. Not with tanks. Pls check Vivek's blog. It's very clear with graphs in all configurations.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 21 Jun 2017 23:27

IAF will never have F16.
We should stop this discussion in this thread.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Jun 2017 23:38

If you take unfavourable conditions for one, it should be applied to the other as well. GEneral rule of thumb, if you have two aircraft with similar performance, fuel fraction, and engine SFCs, their range and combat radius will also be comparable. What does work in F-16s favour is that its fuel fraction deteriorates by a lesser amount with the same amount of payload, vis-a-vis the LCA. But that will be about it.

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 21 Jun 2017 23:59

Rakesh wrote:
So apart from an increased production schedule, what are we learning?

This in itself would be a great lesson. India sorely needs manufacturing knowhow of complex systems. Indian culture respects r & d but not manufacturing. Its time to change that notion. Manufacturing is a science by itself and india has not mastered it. So we are paying for our cultural faults. There is no other choice.

What you want to learn? How to make 4 LCAs per year or how to make 400 F-16 per year.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 22 Jun 2017 00:23

Rakesh wrote: ...
So apart from an increased production schedule, what are we learning?

Repeat the same crap over and over until everybody believes it's true!

The only thing we (or more specifically TATA and its suppliers) will learn after spending a 10-20 years and a few 10's of billions of dollars is how to make half of a f-16 at more or less the same rate of production that HAL makes the MKI or will make the LCA.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 Jun 2017 02:20

shiv wrote:1. This is my opinion
2. Talk of F-16 OT for this thread
3. F-16 assembly (if it occurs) will be about jobs for Indians

I agree with point 2. Since I started it, my fault. Please continue discussion in the single engine thread.

jamwal wrote:IAF will never have F16.
We should stop this discussion in this thread.

IAF will never have F16....now you are toying with my emotions

Again, please continue this discussion in the single engine thread.

To all: I have seen some great replies...tsarkar, geeth are some. Will reply to them all in the single engine thread, as I have questions.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 22 Jun 2017 02:26

geeth wrote:IF a decision is made on the purchase of F16, it is because Uncle has a firm grip on our nuts by way of F404 & F414 engines...No point barking up the wrong trees like HAL DRDO etc....till the time we master majority of tech necessary, someone or other will always keep sqeezing our nur nuts either for money or pleasure or both. So..stop wailing.

One of the sanest reasons given on BR.
After all the Gripen flies with the GE engine too.

is F-16 our MMRCA?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 22 Jun 2017 02:27

Rishi Verma wrote: What you want to learn? How to make 4 LCAs per year or how to make 400 F-16 per year.

And who is teaching us how to make 400 F-16s per year? We would be churning our F-16s at roughly the same rate as the LCA. FACT.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 22 Jun 2017 02:27

jamwal wrote:IAF will never have F16.
We should stop this discussion in this thread.

Why ?
(other than the fact that they (our friends) fly it too)

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 22 Jun 2017 03:03

Will F-Sixteen factory in Desh crush Paki Fauj and Desh Morale ? This may be the permanent stake in Paki heart and Mushburn requiring huge new Burnol factory at Lahore. Paki will never forgive this "betrayal" and carry life long Dushmani.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 22 Jun 2017 03:14

Indranil wrote:
Rishi Verma wrote: What you want to learn? How to make 4 LCAs per year or how to make 400 F-16 per year.
And who is teaching us how to make 400 F-16s per year? We would be churning our F-16s at roughly the same rate as the LCA. FACT.

For some odd reason there has been silence from HAL wrt hiking production above 16/year.

A mix of 16/yr of LCA + Solah is quite potent.

The way I see it, prime driver for Solah induction is to equip squadrons with a reliable and an operational jet while inducting the LCA concurrently.

The MK1a is still not flying and FOC is yet to be achieved. Any further slippages in LCA production can't be ruled out.Relying on it solely is too big a risk wrt re equipment.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 22 Jun 2017 03:32

Prem wrote:Will F-Sixteen factory in Desh crush Paki Fauj and Desh Morale ? This may be the permanent stake in Paki heart and Mushburn requiring huge new Burnol factory at Lahore. Paki will never forgive this "betrayal" and carry life long Dushmani.

India should not remain Paki-centric and therefore an insignificant power. If you want to play in the big league then LCA MK1/1A/2/3.. and the AMCA is the way to go.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 22 Jun 2017 03:36

Why are we discussing F 16 here?