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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 16 Oct 2016 10:23

UN security council as it exists was created by brute force of US, Russia, Britain and France. China was let in as an after thought with some Indian chamchagiri. India should not get seat in reservation category. Hard power will make us indispensable. Right now the role of the UN is being thwarted by states like Pakistan and NoKo and unless India can actually stand up to Pakistan and dominate simply getting into UNSC is no use.

Arjunn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 07 Aug 2011 12:05

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Arjunn » 16 Oct 2016 10:24

Karan M wrote:Yeah sure, IAF doesn't want MMRCA. All due to greedy politicians, "now". LOL.


I thought Rafale was the MMRCA and the IAF wanted 126 of them! and as we are seeing, they are getting the entire 126...enough to fill up 6 squadrons...right? A perpetually starved IAF will grab any fighter that is thrown their way by our political masters...it is not for them to question the dubious nature of how these reached them. You should be asking our greedy political masters the reason for a separate "double engined MMRCA deal" and a "single engined MMRCA deal" and whether that makes sense?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5088
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rakesh » 16 Oct 2016 10:33

FWIW...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Suppliers_Group

Nuclear Suppliers Group
During a state visit to India in November 2010, U.S. President Barack Obama announced U.S. support for India's participation in the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Wassenaar Arrangement, the Australia Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime, "in a phased manner," and to encourage the evolution of regime participation criteria to that end, "consistent with maintaining the core principles of these regimes."

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5088
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rakesh » 16 Oct 2016 10:45

A few days old...

India Kicks Off New Search for MiG-21 Replacement
http://thediplomat.com/2016/10/india-kicks-off-new-search-for-mig-21-replacement/

“This will not be just licensed manufacture. It will be proper transfer of technology. Also, India will become a hub for manufacturing, as well as maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) for other air forces in the region,” he added.


What is the Air Chief's definition of ToT? Because Pratt & Whitney is not going to open the family jewel chest and sell India engine technology. Neither is Scenma, despite promising (which they likely will, but behind closed doors) to revive the Kaveri.

UAE funded the development costs for the APG-80 AESA radar on their Block 60, F-Solahs. But the question remains, can UAE develop an AESA radar on her own after handing over $3 billion to Raytheon?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/APG-80

Arjunn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 07 Aug 2011 12:05

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Arjunn » 16 Oct 2016 11:52

del.
Last edited by Rahul M on 16 Oct 2016 14:43, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: OT post deleted. keep politics off this thread.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2016 12:45

Rakesh wrote:Karan: I think this decision happened in early 2015 when Modi-ji called Parrikar to his office and told him that we are buying only 36 Rafales which surprised even Parrikar. The PM has been promised something big. Maybe we are getting a permanent UN Security Council Seat. This offer might have been made to MMS as well, but he could not do anything without permission from his madam. The US had to wait it out for a few years (2011 to 2014) before they could do the same with PM Modi.


Yesterday I had been thinking the same thing. Are we UNSC permanent seat afterall??

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2016 13:27

Dileep wrote:It was LSP-08 that is getting the IFR probe. It is the plane I went up close to see the wiring loom routing. The probe was not there when I saw it.

And yes, there is automatic recovery if you manage to spin/stall the plane. I did that during my simulator flight. Forgot to retract landing gear and tried to pull up too much. Stall warning came up on HUD, and message of Automatic Recovery came on HUD. The stick and rudder went unresponsive, and the plane went to level flight. Then stick control came back.

Another thing I noticed is that the rudder doesn't seem to do much when you make a turn by stick. But it makes yaw movement in level flight. The plane makes perfect turns by stick alone.

What I don't know is whether the simulator was in a 'newbie mode' or not. My previous experience is only flying fsgear on a PC using keyboard.


Thats a great to here. :D

For turn ideally rudder is not needed at all. All you need to do is bank the aircraft and pull up slightly. And if you want to increase turning rate, bank further and pull up. If there is any adverse yaw, FCA will compensate by auto-deploying rudder by small amount. And yes, it should make yaw movement not only in level flight but also in turning. But then it turns about its CG (and perhaps will go into a spin) and now about a point in space outside the plane (like in a true turn).

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 16 Oct 2016 13:54

Arjunn wrote:...........


There is no doubt that IAS and IPS (and other 'all india services') are the biggest destroyer of our economic, security and human development opportunities.Coming from a family where there are quite a few relatives in them I have had much first hand and second hand experience of this. Its even more poignant that a few of us were in the forces so the differences are so stark to see. There are some good people in IAS, IPS...one of my cousins always stuck to his guns and was always transferred. But he slept peacefully at night.

However Arjunn your post apart from pointing the obvious reality which all Indians know is blatantly political. So I m reporting it.
Last edited by Rahul M on 16 Oct 2016 14:43, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: quoted post deleted

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2016 14:37

shiv wrote:UN security council as it exists was created by brute force of US, Russia, Britain and France. China was let in as an after thought with some Indian chamchagiri. India should not get seat in reservation category. Hard power will make us indispensable. Right now the role of the UN is being thwarted by states like Pakistan and NoKo and unless India can actually stand up to Pakistan and dominate simply getting into UNSC is no use.

I have thought a lot about this UNSC seat. Why shouldn't we just boycott UNSC since anyway it was always used against us and its of no particular use for us. As such its relevance is diminishing in new world order. But I have reached to a conclusion that we should keep attempting to get a seat on the high table, basically to spoil the party. And to that effect I think we should also keep supporting expansion of UNSC to 9-10 Veto members or demolition on Veto altogether. Again the aim should be to make it less effective and in turn neutralise the hegemony of P5 to some extent.

Whether we should buy a seat at UNSC with $50B at the expense of our domestic MIC, I am not convinced.

I 400% agree that we need to be both Powerful and Assertive enough (one with the lack of other is useless) that we will be indispensable. "Khud hi ko kar buland itana.." and all that. And LCA is one of the key foundation stones for the road in this direction. IMO, if we miss this opportunity we will be crying when AMCA comes up too. We will be offered F35 on silver platter while we reach completion of AMCA development. And we will hear the same argument that we hear today - our industry is not ready for 5th Gen manufacturing either in toto or at the scale GOI/IAF likes.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2016 14:40

Akshay Kapoor wrote:However Arjunn your post apart from pointing the obvious reality which all Indians know is blatantly political. So I m reporting it.


I have reported it too. Its too much like a political advertising and totally tangent to the topic at hand.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2016 14:45

Avarachan wrote:The Tejas Mark 2 is being used as a bargaining chip. Several thoughts come to my mind.

1) First, something personal: a feeling of deep sadness. So much sacrifice, so much effort--to be treated like this? Yes, I'm aware of the Mark 1 orders. But the goal for the Tejas program has always been 300-400+ units. It'll take a production run that large to build a serious industrial ecosystem for Indian military aviation.

2) I mean no offense, but the idea that India will get a permanent UNSC seat by giving up the Tejas Mark 2 is absurd. I wonder what Shri Kalam would say if he were alive to see this. "Strength respects strength, not weakness." It's not an accident that all of the P-5 are significant military exporters. If India wants to be a member of the P-5, India has to have similar capacities. There is no other way. Have you noticed that the Gripen/F-16 supporters are saying that India can export 100 of their units? By some amazing coincidence, that's exactly the estimated size of the Tejas's export potential!

3) Sooner or later, India has to stand and defend its treasure. The Empire of Death is falling apart, and India is rising. Sooner or later, the fact that the trend lines have crossed will be obvious to the whole world. The Indian government will have to choose: appease the monster, or allow Indian citizens to flourish to their utmost potential. All of MMS's bowing and scraping did not prevent the Empire from executing 26/11. I wonder when PM Modi will realize that all of his awkward hugs haven't bought him--or India--very much.

4) One significant reason why PM Modi was able to slap Pakistan recently was because of Agony Trishul. Every major country in the world knows its true range. Many people on BRF don't like AKA, but he had the courage to operationalize it. Where would India be today if he had buckled under pressure? After 26/11, AKA threatened to resign if MMS kept on blocking the development of Agony Punch. Does PM Modi have that kind of courage? I hope so. Pakistan is simply a cat's paw. The real challenge will be in dealing with the cat.

5) It is the right of the Indian people to question the negotiation tactics of the Indian government. I think most Indians today would question the return of the Haji Pir Pass to Pakistan in 1965.

I just hope all this talk of a second MMRCA is a ruse and that PM Modi won't proceed with it.


+100. Excellent post.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 16 Oct 2016 15:14

What is agony trishul ?

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

Postby Marten » 16 Oct 2016 15:38

Agni, auto corrected to Agony. True though, for China.

New LCA model outside HAL Corp office bulding - a naval LCA taking off from a ramp. Eye candy.

la.khan
BRFite
Posts: 130
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 05:02

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby la.khan » 16 Oct 2016 15:47

Akshay Kapoor wrote:What is agony trishul ?

Guessing Agony Trishul -> Agni III and Agony Punch -> Agni V.
Last edited by la.khan on 16 Oct 2016 15:48, edited 1 time in total.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4291
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 16 Oct 2016 15:48

Unless the foreign single engine fighter plane RFI is scapped, the LCA and aerospace R&D in general has a bleak future in India.

Screw driver turning monkeys are all over the planet.

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 238
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Bhaskar_T » 16 Oct 2016 17:16

So much for (SP-5, SP-6) being on jigs since more than 6 months and still require 8 more months to give a tentative schedule of July 2017. Once structure is ready (which probably was ready 4-6 months ago for SP-5, SP-6), what is controlling this schedule? Import of ejection seats? Delay of which component(s). I asked them there but no replies.

arsimovich wrote:As per ADA official Tejas FB Page
SP 4 Delivery - Dec 2016
SP 5 and SP 6 Delivery - Jun 2017 (tentative)
Last edited by Bhaskar_T on 16 Oct 2016 18:17, edited 1 time in total.

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby rakall » 16 Oct 2016 17:30

shiv wrote:
rakall wrote:Here is what intrigued me in the WalkTheTalk at HAL.. when Coupta asked Air.Cmde.Muthanna about integrating Meteor BVRAAM, he said LCA can't carry meteor as it is too heavy.. But why?

The innermost pylons (station numbers 1 & 2) are qualified for 1000lt drop tanks, BVRAAM, Bombs & LGBs. In the WalkTheTalk at HAL we r told the innermost pylons used a tandem pylon to drop 2*1000Lb bombs (weight equal to 1000lt drop tank). so when innermost pylons can carry 1000Kg load each, and also able to fire AAMs why cant we put a Meteor BVRAAM (only 185Kgs) there?

Surely it is possible!!!

IMO coupta should have asked Astra not Meteor. Coupta talks like a person who has hurriedly tried to inform himself about some things.


Astra will surely go on Tejas.

But, forget about Coupta - I was confused by the answer from Muthanna. Surely he slipped a bit there.. No reason why Meteor cannot go on the inner most pylons..

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3787
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby deejay » 16 Oct 2016 17:52

Bhaskar_T wrote:So much for being on jigs since more than 6 months and still require 8 more months to give a tentative schedule of July 2017. Once structure is ready (which probably was ready months ago), what is controlling this schedule? Import of ejection seats? Delay of which component(s). I asked them there but no replies.

arsimovich wrote:As per ADA official Tejas FB Page
SP 4 Delivery - Dec 2016
SP 5 and SP 6 Delivery - Jun 2017 (tentative)


SP 4 delivery will be Mar '17. My prediction. Will be happy even if I am wrong by a day (ie. deliver in Feb)

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 496
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Avarachan » 16 Oct 2016 18:18

JayS, thanks.

One more thing about exports. For several years, India has talked about the Tejas being a potential export replacement for the Mig-21/F-5. Mark 1A certainly can be, for some of them. (I bet that many countries will want to stick with Russia or the U.S. for geopolitical reasons, though.) Nonetheless, I wonder if Tejas Mark 2 can be positioned as an export replacement for the Mirage 2000. (The Mirage F1 customer list is thought-provoking, as well.) In terms of the financial/military/geopolitical profile of Mirage 2000 customers, there might be a good fit for the Tejas Mark 2. (The Rafale and AMCA will be too expensive for most of them. I imagine that Dassault is cursing the loss of the Novi Avion project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novi_Avion) The timelines fit, as well.

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 238
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Bhaskar_T » 16 Oct 2016 18:27

Whenever SP-4 gets delivered, either in Dec 2016 or by March 2017, as a pro-Tejas fan, I am happy to change my accounting to spread a good word that HAL delivered 3 Tejas in one year (who cares if it is calendar year or financial year). :lol: I need this strategy since Pakis keep proclaiming about their Kamran PAC delivering 15-20 JF-17/year.

A Noob pooch - Saw one more comment somewhere either on facebook or youtube, "that there are just two chaff and flare dispensers in Tejas which may prove inadequate during combat". Can anyone throw some more light on this? What does this 2 chaff and flare dispensers mean? Does it mean that once Tejas receives warning that an AAM has been fired upon it, Tejas will only have two opportunities to fire/release the chaff/flare thing since it has 2 chaff and flare dispenser? How many do we have in Mirage-2000 and Su-30MKI?

deejay wrote:
Bhaskar_T wrote:So much for being on jigs since more than 6 months and still require 8 more months to give a tentative schedule of July 2017. Once structure is ready (which probably was ready months ago), what is controlling this schedule? Import of ejection seats? Delay of which component(s). I asked them there but no replies.



SP 4 delivery will be Mar '17. My prediction. Will be happy even if I am wrong by a day (ie. deliver in Feb)

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35617
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby SaiK » 16 Oct 2016 20:40

Trishul BTW was tech demo.. and it is replaced by "Mitri". No Agony there I suppose :mrgreen: . status?

And "Agony 6.5/7" should deliver the multi headed petals

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16285
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rahul M » 16 Oct 2016 21:05

rakall wrote:
shiv wrote:IMO coupta should have asked Astra not Meteor. Coupta talks like a person who has hurriedly tried to inform himself about some things.


Astra will surely go on Tejas.

But, forget about Coupta - I was confused by the answer from Muthanna. Surely he slipped a bit there.. No reason why Meteor cannot go on the inner most pylons..

may be he confused with the brahmos which they were talking about at the time.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 16 Oct 2016 21:11

I would guess it has two cartridges of chaff and flares. One cartridge has many chaffs in it.
Last edited by JayS on 16 Oct 2016 21:24, edited 1 time in total.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12684
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Lalmohan » 16 Oct 2016 21:16

maybe its jsf...?

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2258
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JTull » 16 Oct 2016 21:53

Front view

Image

Image

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3787
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby deejay » 16 Oct 2016 22:00

Bhaskar_T wrote:Whenever SP-4 gets delivered, either in Dec 2016 or by March 2017, as a pro-Tejas fan, I am happy to change my accounting to spread a good word that HAL delivered 3 Tejas in one year (who cares if it is calendar year or financial year). :lol: I need this strategy since Pakis keep proclaiming about their Kamran PAC delivering 15-20 JF-17/year.

A Noob pooch - Saw one more comment somewhere either on facebook or youtube, "that there are just two chaff and flare dispensers in Tejas which may prove inadequate during combat". Can anyone throw some more light on this? What does this 2 chaff and flare dispensers mean? Does it mean that once Tejas receives warning that an AAM has been fired upon it, Tejas will only have two opportunities to fire/release the chaff/flare thing since it has 2 chaff and flare dispenser? How many do we have in Mirage-2000 and Su-30MKI?

...


The sentiments are understood Sir. The slow rate of production is not to be taken lightly. This is a critical parameter.

Arjunn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 07 Aug 2011 12:05

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Arjunn » 16 Oct 2016 22:11

Akshay Kapoor wrote:
Arjunn wrote:...........


There is no doubt that IAS and IPS (and other 'all india services') are the biggest destroyer of our economic, security and human development opportunities.Coming from a family where there are quite a few relatives in them I have had much first hand and second hand experience of this. Its even more poignant that a few of us were in the forces so the differences are so stark to see. There are some good people in IAS, IPS...one of my cousins always stuck to his guns and was always transferred. But he slept peacefully at night.

However Arjunn your post apart from pointing the obvious reality which all Indians know is blatantly political. So I m reporting it.


First of all, let me make it clear that what you call a blatantly political post, is a reply to a political query raised by Rakesh with regard to my opinion on misrule by politicians in general affecting our defense acquisitions, the Tejas in particular, and whether I consider the UPA and AK Antony as being alternatives to the present NDA dispensation. Check out his post in the previous page. I can understand Rakesh objecting to my post as it may provide a differing opinion to his own political preferences, but I think he is a mature person who is unlikely to have a knee jerk reaction as you and JayS have exhibited. I would have engaged you in a debate if you had a differing opinion to mine on how it is important to have a political dispensation at the centre that would not hesitate to implement out of the box ideas and doing away with the bureaucrats who would hinder the further development and maturation of the Tejas. I consider it the cowards way out to report a post that makes you uncomfortable because perhaps it touches your delicate political sensibilities nurtured by our present political masters, and not having the courage to debate me on the points I have raised if you don't agree with me.

When we refer to defense acquisitions, the Tejas is right at the forefront and the blatant neglect of our own very capable "single engined fighter" in favour of a ridiculously expensive foreign "single engined jet fighter" by the current political dispensation smacks of corruption and nepotism of the highest order, but I get the impression that you don't consider this blatant neglect of our indigenous effort by our current political masters as "blatantly political." Only my questioning this blatantly greedy political decision by our present political masters is "blatantly political" in your and JayS' eyes.

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Suresh S » 16 Oct 2016 22:20

shiv wrote:UN security council as it exists was created by brute force of US, Russia, Britain and France. China was let in as an after thought with some Indian chamchagiri. India should not get seat in reservation category. Hard power will make us indispensable. Right now the role of the UN is being thwarted by states like Pakistan and NoKo and unless India can actually stand up to Pakistan and dominate simply getting into UNSC is no use.


I like that shivji especially that bit about reservation category. I would add though with hard power by which I am sure u mean military power we obviously have to have plenty of soft power which in my book is economy in addition to culture and other things .

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5088
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rakesh » 16 Oct 2016 22:44

Neshant wrote:Unless the foreign single engine fighter plane RFI is scrapped, the LCA and aerospace R&D in general has a bleak future in India

Well said. Look at it this way Neshant Saar.

India Kicks Off New Search for MiG-21 Replacement
http://thediplomat.com/2016/10/india-kicks-off-new-search-for-mig-21-replacement/

As per the link above, the Govt of India has just issued the RFI for 90 phoren MII single engine fighters. Now proponents of the Block 70 F-Solah have stated that the supply chain is well established and vast in the US. Alas, the same cannot be said about the Gripen NG - that has been offered to India - which is a paper plane. So when the Block 70 comes, India will have access to that vast supply chain. Now the Air Chief says the following - as per the above link - This will not be just licensed manufacture. It will be proper transfer of technology. Also, India will become a hub for manufacturing, as well as maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) for other air forces in the region.

It remains to be seen what is his definition of proper transfer of technology. Because India will not get engine tech or radar tech just because we ask for it. That has been clearly established on BRF. So what will likely happen is screwdrivergiri. We will gets the parts needed from the vast supply chain to assemble the aircraft and assemble is what HAL or a private company will do. There will be no transfer of technology in that sense. And as Karan said - whack Pakistan - and see how quickly that vast supply chain dries up. So what is the point of buying the Block 70 or even the Gripen NG for that matter? If we plan to deliver roses and lotuses, then by all means buy either one. Because that is only what they will be good for.

Now otherwise, if we are getting the proper transfer of technology - as the Air Chief says - then HAL or the private company will need to absorb that technology to enable the vision of MII. So build everything from the raw material stage. Absorption of technology takes a considerable amount of time and time is not something the IAF has. Like I said earlier, in a perfect utopian world, these 90 MII phoren fighters will take roughly 10 years to complete production. And we are only in the RFI stage. There is the RFP stage, then the down select stage, then the negotiation stage, then signing the contract and only then production of aircraft will commence. Governments come and go. Babudom stays forever. And babus decide how the process moves, not the Government. Case in point - the IAF wanted 126 Mirage 2000s, the GoI agreed but babus decided otherwise. The rest is history.

This may be a soundbite to some. But this is not Make in India (MII), but rather Rape in India (RII).

I am also concerned at the Air Chief's statement on maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) for other air forces in the region. Will we be required to support Pakistan's F-Solahs as well? I mean since Lockheed Martin has promised that the entire production line - tools and all - is being moved to India right? Perhaps that is an unnecessary worry on my part.

Either scenario - proper transfer of technology or otherwise - flies in the face of the logic when it comes to the Tejas. We are willing to purchase 90 phoren fighters and wait for as long as that takes (who cares about squadron depletion at that point!) to complete. But open a second line or improve the bloody line we have now for the Tejas is anathema. That scenario - all the naysayers start jumping and crying hoarse about squadron depletion, Tejas does not meet the needs of the air force, supply chain does not exist or is in very poor condition, production capability is not up to par and the list goes on. If we are destined for screwdrivergiri, I would rather do it with the Tejas than anything else.

Perhaps another soundbite, but history may talk of the Tejas in this manner.

A beautiful aircraft whose wings got clipped because of vested interests.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2843
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby arshyam » 16 Oct 2016 23:57

^^What are the chances that some of those vested interests could be the ones with the engines? I suspect that this tamasha is somehow linked to the availability of those F414 engines, or lack thereof. Did they ever arrive? Heck, did we get more F404 engines than the initial 100, for the Mk 1/1A?

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 17 Oct 2016 00:01

Arjunn wrote:
Akshay Kapoor wrote:
There is no doubt that IAS and IPS (and other 'all india services') are the biggest destroyer of our economic, security and human development opportunities.Coming from a family where there are quite a few relatives in them I have had much first hand and second hand experience of this. Its even more poignant that a few of us were in the forces so the differences are so stark to see. There are some good people in IAS, IPS...one of my cousins always stuck to his guns and was always transferred. But he slept peacefully at night.

However Arjunn your post apart from pointing the obvious reality which all Indians know is blatantly political. So I m reporting it.


First of all, let me make it clear that what you call a blatantly political post, is a reply to a political query raised by Rakesh with regard to my opinion on misrule by politicians in general affecting our defense acquisitions, the Tejas in particular, and whether I consider the UPA and AK Antony as being alternatives to the present NDA dispensation. Check out his post in the previous page. I can understand Rakesh objecting to my post as it may provide a differing opinion to his own political preferences, but I think he is a mature person who is unlikely to have a knee jerk reaction as you and JayS have exhibited. I would have engaged you in a debate if you had a differing opinion to mine on how it is important to have a political dispensation at the centre that would not hesitate to implement out of the box ideas and doing away with the bureaucrats who would hinder the further development and maturation of the Tejas. I consider it the cowards way out to report a post that makes you uncomfortable because perhaps it touches your delicate political sensibilities nurtured by our present political masters, and not having the courage to debate me on the points I have raised if you don't agree with me.

When we refer to defense acquisitions, the Tejas is right at the forefront and the blatant neglect of our own very capable "single engined fighter" in favour of a ridiculously expensive foreign "single engined jet fighter" by the current political dispensation smacks of corruption and nepotism of the highest order, but I get the impression that you don't consider this blatant neglect of our indigenous effort by our current political masters as "blatantly political." Only my questioning this blatantly greedy political decision by our present political masters is "blatantly political" in your and JayS' eyes.


Don't you dare use that 'coward' word to me. You don't know me. Also you cannot threaten a for reporting a post which is blatantly political. I will report you again for being abusive.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5088
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rakesh » 17 Oct 2016 00:08

Asrhyam: Maybe. As per wiki - 86% of F-16 C/Ds (the C/D variant is from Block 25 onwards) are powered by GE F110 turbofans. I tried searching for any news on F414 engines for the Tejas Mk2, but nothing came, except for this. I don't know anything about the site or the author, so I cannot vouch for its authenticity.

Will India Ditch GE Engines For Reviving ‘Kaveri’ Project With French Offer?http://www.defenseworld.net/news/16511/Will_India_Ditch_GE_Engines_For_Reviving____Kaveri____Project_With_French_Offer_#.WAPIl5MrJuU

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 238
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Bhaskar_T » 17 Oct 2016 00:51

Rakesh - Below article is from Sept 2015 on GE F414 engine which expected first GE F414 engine to arrive in desh by Sept 2015 (it didn't quote an year, but seems like 2015). At times, I get this feeling that Tejas-MK2 prototype is being secretly developed in HAL hangars in Bangalore and in 2019, suddenly pics will appear taken from behind the bushes. :lol:

PS - It is also key to note that it was expected that a tender would be issued for engines to be used in AMCA and I think tender has been issued.


http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/first-tejas-mark-ii-engine-to-arrive-in-september-115070600054_1.html

Sept 2015, By Ajai Shukla.

The plan to develop a more powerful, modernised version of the current Tejas fighter is getting a welcome boost. In September, US engine-maker General Electric (GE) plans to deliver the first F-414INS6 engine (hereafter F-414), which will power the Tejas Mark II.

The F-414 engine's maximum power output of 98 kiloNewtons (kN) will make the Tejas Mark II faster and nimbler than the current Mark I fighter, which gets just 84 kN of peak power from its GE F-404IN engine. The F-414 will also provide the burst of power needed for the Naval Tejas to take off from an aircraft carrier deck on 200 metres of runway.

In 2010, the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which manages the Tejas programme, chose GE over Eurojet to supply 99 engines for the Tejas Mark II. Of these, 16 are being delivered fully-built, so that ADA can build prototypes of the Mark II fighter for ground and flight test programmes.

Meanwhile, Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) will establish a facility to manufacture the remaining 83 engines in Bengaluru. With the Indian Air Force (IAF) and navy likely to order at least 160 Tejas Mark II fighters, the HAL facility could eventually build about 700 engines (assuming a fighter uses 3.5 engines in its service life).

Aerospace experts like Pushpinder Singh of Vayu Magazine say the benefits of the more powerful F-414 would be negated by its additional weight and the re-design of the Tejas that they say will be needed to accommodate the engine.

Experts also argue the Tejas' constricted air intake will prevent the F-414 from sucking in the air it requires, even with extensive redesign. In that case, the engine would not deliver its rated 98 kN thrust.

Rejecting this view, GE and ADA officials say they will accommodate the F-414 without problem or extensive redesign, and that it will perform to its designed potential.

Their claim is supported by the engine data on the GE website (see graphic), which indicates the F-414 is no larger than the F-404. Nor is it significantly heavier, says ADA.

While GE has bagged the deal to supply India the F-414, an even bigger prize could prove elusive - the supply of a more powerful version of the F-414 for the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), a fifth-generation medium fighter that ADA plans to develop, with the IAF standing ready to buy 200.

As Business Standard reported (June 1, "Carter to face Indian demand for engine technology") the defence ministry has asked the United States to let the Defence Research and Development Organisation work with GE in jointly upgrading the F-414 to a rating of 110 KN of peak power. ADA believes the AMCA needs 220 kN of peak power from its twin engines.

This is welcomed by GE, which had earlier worked for the US Navy on upgrading the F-414 to a 116 kN engine designated F-414 enhanced engine.With that project now shelved, GE would like to see it revived with Indian partnership, funding and a large assured market. Yet, Washington is stonewalling the Indian request, even though the two countries had established a "joint working group" to explore cooperation in engine design during President Obama's visit to India in January.

A disappointed Indian defence ministry is now issuing a global tender, inviting aero engine firms to co-develop a suitable engine with the DRDO.

Senior defence ministry sources say that Eurojet, the European consortium whose EJ200 engine lost out to GE's F-414 in the contest to power the Tejas Mark II, has satisfied the DRDO it can uprate the EJ200 to 110 kN. Snecma, the French company that builds the Rafale's M-88 engine, will also be issued a tender. However the M-88, which currently generates 75 kN of thrust, cannot be uprated beyond 105 kN.

"Fighters are designed around a pre-selected engine. We will issue the tender quickly and select an engine for the AMCA so that the programme does not get delayed. If Washington chooses to deny India engine technology by preventing GE from working with the DRDO, that will have its own implications," a top defence ministry official says.



Rakesh wrote:Asrhyam: Maybe. As per wiki - 86% of F-16 C/Ds (the C/D variant is from Block 25 onwards) are powered by GE F110 turbofans. I tried searching for any news on F414 engines for the Tejas Mk2, but nothing came, except for this. I don't know anything about the site or the author, so I cannot vouch for its authenticity.

Will India Ditch GE Engines For Reviving ‘Kaveri’ Project With French Offer?http://www.defenseworld.net/news/16511/Will_India_Ditch_GE_Engines_For_Reviving____Kaveri____Project_With_French_Offer_#.WAPIl5MrJuU

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Suresh S » 17 Oct 2016 00:57

Calling a officer of the Indian army A coward without any knowledge about the person deserves a permanent ban. Everyone on this board understands the importance of Tejas but we are not privy to info the govt has and requirements of the forces and situation on the ground . As shiv has mentioned in one of his posts that simply snapping your fingers does not make thousands of parts u need to make large nos of Tejas appear out of nowhere. Logistics less talked about but critical boss . As for congis that is not a govt but bunch of scam artists who deserves to be in jail enmass.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3361
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 17 Oct 2016 01:00

Arjunn wrote:First of all, let me make it clear that what you call a blatantly political post, is a reply to a political query raised by Rakesh with regard to my opinion on misrule by politicians in general affecting our defense acquisitions, the Tejas in particular, and whether I consider the UPA and AK Antony as being alternatives to the present NDA dispensation. Check out his post in the previous page. I can understand Rakesh objecting to my post as it may provide a differing opinion to his own political preferences, but I think he is a mature person who is unlikely to have a knee jerk reaction as you and JayS have exhibited. I would have engaged you in a debate if you had a differing opinion to mine on how it is important to have a political dispensation at the centre that would not hesitate to implement out of the box ideas and doing away with the bureaucrats who would hinder the further development and maturation of the Tejas. I consider it the cowards way out to report a post that makes you uncomfortable because perhaps it touches your delicate political sensibilities nurtured by our present political masters, and not having the courage to debate me on the points I have raised if you don't agree with me.

When we refer to defense acquisitions, the Tejas is right at the forefront and the blatant neglect of our own very capable "single engined fighter" in favour of a ridiculously expensive foreign "single engined jet fighter" by the current political dispensation smacks of corruption and nepotism of the highest order, but I get the impression that you don't consider this blatant neglect of our indigenous effort by our current political masters as "blatantly political." Only my questioning this blatantly greedy political decision by our present political masters is "blatantly political" in your and JayS' eyes.


:lol: :lol:

Go to Politics thread and discuss it there as much as you want.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3860
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kartik » 17 Oct 2016 01:53

rakall wrote:Here is what intrigued me in the WalkTheTalk at HAL.. when Coupta asked Air.Cmde.Muthanna about integrating Meteor BVRAAM, he said LCA can't carry meteor as it is too heavy.. But why?

The innermost pylons (station numbers 1 & 2) are qualified for 1000lt drop tanks, BVRAAM, Bombs & LGBs. In the WalkTheTalk at HAL we r told the innermost pylons used a tandem pylon to drop 2*1000Lb bombs (weight equal to 1000lt drop tank). so when innermost pylons can carry 1000Kg load each, and also able to fire AAMs why cant we put a Meteor BVRAAM (only 185Kgs) there?

Surely it is possible!!!


Yes it is possible, but the question really relates to whether the radar on the Tejas Mk1 can exploit the full range of the Meteor..after all, the Gripen C, which is a Tejas Mk1 class aircraft is integrated with the Meteor, so carrying the missile is not really going to be the issue.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5088
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rakesh » 17 Oct 2016 04:04

Bhaskar_T wrote:Rakesh - Below article is from Sept 2015 on GE F414 engine which expected first GE F414 engine to arrive in desh by Sept 2015 (it didn't quote an year, but seems like 2015). At times, I get this feeling that Tejas-MK2 prototype is being secretly developed in HAL hangars in Bangalore and in 2019, suddenly pics will appear taken from behind the bushes. :lol:

It appears your wish has come true Saar. Check it out...

LCA Tejas Mk 2 testing by 2017: DRDO Chief
http://www.ibtimes.co.in/lca-tejas-mk-2-testing-by-2017-drdo-chief-667693

The LCA Tejas Mk 2 will be available for testing by 2017 and will not be ready before 2024.


The DRDO chief, however, confirmed that the proposed LCA Tejas Mk 2 will be using the powerful General Electric F414-GE-INS6 engines and will feature a lengthier fuselage. But there was no clarification by him if this he was talking about the Air Force or the Navy variant of the MK 2 aircraft.


The report noted the lack of clarity on the IAF's participation with LCA Tejas Mk 2, given the recent statement by Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha to the media: "As of now we are not interested in Mk 2."


So it is the Naval variant then, because the IAF does not want the Mk.2

They want another new phoren toy called Block 70 or NG (Next Generation) Paper :)

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4291
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 17 Oct 2016 04:15

Rakesh wrote:It remains to be seen what is his definition of proper transfer of technology. Because India will not get engine tech or radar tech just because we ask for it. That has been clearly established on BRF. So what will likely happen is screwdrivergiri. We will gets the parts needed from the vast supply chain to assemble the aircraft and assemble is what HAL or a private company will do. There will be no transfer of technology in that sense.


Rakesh Bhai, "transfer of technology" regardless of what form it comes in is a totally meaningless buzzword.

Handing over bags of money to a foreign country will never create a domestic R&D aerospace base.

Only by working through increasingly complex domestic aerospace projects can an ecosystem of competent private companies arise.

Killing the LCA, kills all of that.

Whenever you hear the term "Transfer of Technology", just know that we are paying an obscene amount of money to support a foreign R&D base - which is what ToT really is 95% of the time.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4291
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 17 Oct 2016 04:19

Rakesh wrote:LCA Tejas Mk 2 testing by 2017: DRDO Chief


HAL better put the Mk 2 on the fast track.

This will be their last chance to save the LCA from going the way of the Marut and getting killed off by the foreign single engine fighter import lobby.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Vivek K » 17 Oct 2016 07:49

Why are Indian entities unable to reverse engineer components? In todays times with laser based systems geometries of components can be accurately replicated. Metallurgy seems to be a problem but there I cannot believe that a country that can send probes to the moon and Mars cannot produce the required metallurgy.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests