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.
Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 418
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi_Tri » 11 Jul 2017 15:26

Want to provide competition to HAL?

Ask private party to assemble LCA in addition to HAL. Find this talk of developing local assembly capability only through assembly of foreign fighter very facetious.

OT here.

Should getting funds for AMCA, Ghatak be difficult given that we are splurging 1000s of crores on Smart Cities and like?

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nirav » 11 Jul 2017 15:48

Excellent post, Zynda Saar !

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1974
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kakarat » 11 Jul 2017 17:05

Saurav Jha‏ @SJha1618 4:26 PM - 11 Jul 2017

Don't be surprised if you hear something completely fatuous such as 'F-35 is a single engine jet, it doesn't compete with the AMCA'.

The truth is all major platform imports compete with indigenous programs because money is not available in unlimited quantities.


A point many here will never accept/understand

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby NRao » 11 Jul 2017 17:47

First and foremost, IMHO, the LCA is a thumping success. The lack of a LCA Mk2is in NO way a failure. However, as I had posted - between 1/2 years ago - the LCA is a tech demo and that is how it is being treated right now. And, rightly so - that is the way techs progress.

One of the reasons it is a tech demo is that the LCA is not a complete Indian plane. It will reach that crowing moment around 2020-22ish.

A few comments ...............................

Zynda wrote:My thoughts based on some of my interactions with a couple of experienced ex-scientists:

1. It will be hard to transition from current LCA (even Mk.1A) to AMCA. Better to do incremental upgrades and test it on a relatively known platform like LCA. So Mk.2 development has to continue.


Why "hard to transition"? What percentage of an "LCA" would/could translate to an "AMCA"? I would expect a lot in the very early models of the AMCA - just to get her up in the air. But, for the real-deal AMCA I would hope/expect very little. Even the skin of the AMCA will need better heat management, etc and as a consequence I just do not expect them to use this LCA techs - the skin - in the final model.

Same goes for the rest of the AMCA. Even the missiles better be designed for an internal fit, while retaining the features of the external analogs. Far better sensors, flush mounted, etc, etc, etc.

The AMCA was supposed to be a fly by light plane. Have no idea if that is still in the plans. (Check AMCA thread for more details.)

The AMCA has always had a dedicated team - I think for about 15 years now!!!!! They are NOT starting ground up.

I think the LCA will help in some areas, like real estate management, etc, but not too much beyond that. The AMCA should be - my expectations - a quantum leap, not a transitional one.

2. Mk.2 program has to continue for the sake of technology progress if not for induction purpose. Since the chances of Mk.2 having a future with IAF/IN is doubtful, ADA can propose much more ambitious upgrade points including introducing VLO features. If Mk.2 can achieve required test points lets say by 2025, development of AMCA will be easier IMHO.


The LCA Mk2 no longer brings anything to the table. What was expected out of the Mk2 should be incorporated into the Mk1A - which is now the lead plane for the IAF. For the MIC it will still be a play ground. Until, by my expectations, till 2020-22.

5. Of course, IAF & IN should be involved in working with ADA right from conception stage. Any changes in ASR mid-way should be addressed by including those capabilities in further tranches rather than having all the bells & whistles right in the first batch.


And, both the IAF and the IN have been very involved with the AMCA. You are not going to find much out there, but there is sufficient amount of info.

Also, I would expect much less AMCA info as, compared to the LCA, to work itself out to teh news outlets. Just the nature of the lead.

6. Let IAF induct Mk.1 & Mk.1A per current agreed numbers.


First I hope HAL is able to produce a Mk1A.

Secondly, the IAF should absorb as many as teh production line needs to be kept open. 250+ is my expectation.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4358
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Manish_Sharma » 11 Jul 2017 18:16

NRao wrote:
One of the reasons it is a tech demo is that the LCA is not a complete Indian plane. It will reach that crowing moment around 2020-22ish.


Hari Om
Hari Om

So AMCA won't be a 'tech demo 2.0' due to that dtti driven ge414 engine? Won't the same arguments be made to buy F35 instead of AMCA?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby NRao » 11 Jul 2017 18:59

Manish_Sharma wrote:
NRao wrote:
One of the reasons it is a tech demo is that the LCA is not a complete Indian plane. It will reach that crowing moment around 2020-22ish.


Hari Om
Hari Om

So AMCA won't be a 'tech demo 2.0' due to that dtti driven ge414 engine? Won't the same arguments be made to buy F35 instead of AMCA?


I certainly hope not. But certainly not to the extent the LCA was.

For one the GE F414 INS6 "enhanced" engine, for the AMCA, will be an Indian IP. Unlike the F404 and even unlike the French assisted Kaveri, actually.

Do not follow the radar, etc, but an enhanced Uttam, perhaps?

Finally, as I posted, the AMCA effort is NOT as dormant as people think it to be. They have a far better grasp than they had at the same juncture with the LCA. They better do.






Besides, a guy sitting at the other end of the world, year/months ago stated that the Mk2 will not come (for the IAF too) and people with connections with HAL/ADA/DRDO/etc were not able to see it coming? Strange.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1765
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 11 Jul 2017 19:05

NRao, as you put it, AMCA will be a quantum leap. For ex: Since the ADA team is familiar with control laws, structures etc., it will be easier for them to lighten the Mk.2 and gain experience tweaking the same before applying it to AMCA. Of course it won't be copy & paste from LCA to AMCA, but the underlying principles will remain the same. From what I hear, from an aerodynamic POV, the current LCA can use a lot of improvement. I think some of it were earmarked to be improved in LCA Mk.2. Again known plane, apply incremental updates and test and use the results to fine tune mathematical models.

How long before the first prototype of AMCA will take to the skies? The other way to look at it is with LCA incremental updates, the number of unknown variables reduces and easier to troubleshoot/learn vs incorporating everything in to a newer complex model.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4434
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 11 Jul 2017 19:14

^^^
Again, we see that there is a finite amount of funds. If x amount is being spent on imported MII, then it steals all the funds that could have been available for Mk.2 R&D and production. Not to say but AMCA and UCAV could also be impacted. Remains to be seen.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1765
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 11 Jul 2017 19:22

^^True. My comments are based on the premise that adequate funding needs to be made available by GoI if we are serious about having an indigenous aerospace capability.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8055
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 11 Jul 2017 19:50

Okay. I am back. I have been reading a lot of nonsense on this thread, but did not have time to respond. Time to take down the import pasand lobby here. If you post crap on this thread, be prepared to be called out.

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nirav » 11 Jul 2017 19:53

Indranil wrote:Okay. I am back. I have been reading a lot of nonsense on this thread, but did not have time to respond. Time to take down the import pasand lobby here. If you post crap on this thread, be prepared to be called out.


What do you mean by import pasand lobby ?

Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2004
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Bala Vignesh » 11 Jul 2017 20:29

Indranil wrote:Okay. I am back. I have been reading a lot of nonsense on this thread, but did not have time to respond. Time to take down the import pasand lobby here. If you post crap on this thread, be prepared to be called out.

Looking forward to the tidbits from your chaiwallah that you can share, Indranilda!!
BTW, saw an SP bird tearing up the sky over my home yesterday and today. I am hoping that it is the SP6 undergoing acceptance checks before delivery to the Flying Daggers!!

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5810
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Dileep » 11 Jul 2017 20:52

Aam-Ka is a ppt plane right now. There is a "team" but that have very few people, very little allocation etc. They draw different concepts and show it around. Meanwhile, some action is happening in researching key technologies such as FBL, VLO, Sensor fusion etc. That is what I gather from the chatter. Nothing is finalized, in fact there is nothing to finalize. Some of the MK2 "cool stuff" was supposed to mature into Aam-Ka.

Here is a rhetoric question: What if ADA is merged with HAL? Have anyone thought about it?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby NRao » 11 Jul 2017 21:11

From what I hear, from an aerodynamic POV, the current LCA can use a lot of improvement. I think some of it were earmarked to be improved in LCA Mk.2.


zynda,

Thanks!!

Not surprised. I have posted what I have thought and at the very least, pretty much all my predictions have come true - just by connecting the dots. I really do not have any more to say about the LCA. But, to your point, I think they should and will continue with some aspects of it. After all the Mk1A is no dud (nor is the Mk1 BTW), but obviously can use some refinements/improvements, which should be supported.

I think it is time to move on to the AMCA.

Dileep wrote:Aam-Ka is a ppt plane right now. There is a "team" but that have very few people, very little allocation etc. They draw different concepts and show it around. Meanwhile, some action is happening in researching key technologies such as FBL, VLO, Sensor fusion etc. That is what I gather from the chatter. Nothing is finalized, in fact there is nothing to finalize. Some of the MK2 "cool stuff" was supposed to mature into Aam-Ka


Paper plane? They have already spent some $300 million, taken a model to Calspan (some 2/3 years ago?), requested $2 billion and at that time were confident of getting those funds. I also recall articles of research that had gone into FBL - some 5+ years ago. And, on Indian request India-GE are working on an engine for the AMCA. Still a paper plane?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 11 Jul 2017 21:24

srai and nirav,

I think HAL taking over LCA is the right thing to continue on to Mk2.
Leaves ADA to concentrate on AMCA.
HAL has to ensure current Mk1 and then Mk1A are produced and move on to the Mk2.
They now have 1.5 assembly areas. The half is from the Kiran hanger. The full assembly line is in works.

Also somewhere I saw a IAF tender for 200x new hardened aircraft shelters.


I would think the HAS length limitation is being overcome.

So need to take a complete picture.


Turns out the tenders are for existing fighter aircraft and only 108.

Dileep, PPT charts is how concepts are promoted and trade studies undertaken. Even in massa
Usually hardware nerds don't like that and want to jump into development. Same in massa too.

In old days the charts were on mylar before Macintosh came with ppt.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cosmo_R » 11 Jul 2017 21:43

ramana wrote:srai and nirav,

...

Dileep, PPT charts is how concepts are promoted and trade studies undertaken. Even in massa
Usually hardware nerds don't like that and want to jump into development. Same in massa too.

In old days the charts were on mylar before Macintosh came with ppt.


Yes. I remember IBM's famous 'foils' (slides for OH projector).

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4358
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Manish_Sharma » 11 Jul 2017 21:55

NRao wrote:The LCA Mk2 no longer brings anything to the table. What was expected out of the Mk2 should be incorporated into the Mk1A - which is now the lead plane for the IAF. For the MIC it will still be a play ground. Until, by my expectations, till 2020-22.


Satnaam Satnaam!!! :shock:

ADA and Bharatvarsh has as much right to create Mk2 as much as f16 had myriad blocks. As much as grippen E being created from plain grippen.

Those ADA scientists know that fattening a little bit of airframe and lengthening by half metres will do wonders for an already wonderful aircraft. So It is being suffocated to fund Foreign companies and gora nations.

I SAY F16V-70 BRINGS NOTHING TO TABLE.

GRIPPEN E BRINGS NOTHING TO TABLE.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby negi » 11 Jul 2017 22:01

Any talk of AMCA without getting LCA over the hill will be like talking about clearing 12td std before clearing 10th class boards.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4213
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby chola » 11 Jul 2017 22:19

We are in this depressing spiral because we cannot productionize an indigenous design.

It all comes down to the following: either ADA could not design LCA of proper specs with domestic parts or HAL and its network of suppliers, after decades of MiGs and SUs, still don't have the ability to mass produce components needed for LCA.

In either case, the PSUs are not working. Let's give Tata and the private sector a try now. If it is too late for the LCA, please let the private sector in early on AMCA at least.
Last edited by chola on 11 Jul 2017 22:20, edited 1 time in total.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2926
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby tsarkar » 11 Jul 2017 22:20

Dileep wrote:What if ADA is merged with HAL? Have anyone thought about it?

Very bad idea - design and manufacturing are two different sciences requiring adequate focus on each.

Mature organizations like Dassault or LM can ensure adequate focus on both but neither ADA nor HAL nor MoD has reached that maturity. ADA will lose whatever design capability it gained if swallowed by HAL.

BTW, HAL is actually trying that.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 11 Jul 2017 22:29

Dileep wrote:Here is a rhetoric question: What if ADA is merged with HAL? Have anyone thought about it?


Did you know ADA was from HAL?
Kota Harinarayana and the bulk of the ADA early cohort were from HAL.

Air Marshal. M. Wollen (R), the then HAL Chairman and Managing Director, released them from HAL design bureau to staff ADA.

So that would be full circle.

Having said that seems like ADA forgot manufacturing, maintainability engineering while doing the LCA design layout or did not do all that while converting the Tech Demonstrator to the production variant.
Hence all these hiccups.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby NRao » 12 Jul 2017 00:10

******* poof *******

Sorry Manish.
Last edited by NRao on 12 Jul 2017 00:21, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54175
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 12 Jul 2017 00:15

Guys I don't want strawmen or rhetoric.

Please just facts.
Enough discussion threads makes this also a hot air forum.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cybaru » 12 Jul 2017 00:50

Rishi_Tri wrote:Want to provide competition to HAL?

Ask private party to assemble LCA in addition to HAL. Find this talk of developing local assembly capability only through assembly of foreign fighter very facetious.

OT here.

Should getting funds for AMCA, Ghatak be difficult given that we are splurging 1000s of crores on Smart Cities and like?


I think HAL is really moving towards being an integrator and most of the other stuff is anyways going to private players. As the MK1 and MK1A stabilize I think either time to produce an aircraft will go down or they will add more jigs. It doesn't cost that much to put in a new line.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8055
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 12 Jul 2017 01:13

chola wrote:We are in this depressing spiral because we cannot productionize an indigenous design.

It all comes down to the following: either ADA could not design LCA of proper specs with domestic parts or HAL and its network of suppliers, after decades of MiGs and SUs, still don't have the ability to mass produce components needed for LCA.

In either case, the PSUs are not working. Let's give Tata and the private sector a try now. If it is too late for the LCA, please let the private sector in early on AMCA at least.

Stop this nonsense. HAL has firm orders for 40 aircraft. According to plan it was supposed to produce 6 aircraft this year. It is moddle of the year and it has delivered 3. 4th to be delivered very soon.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8055
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 12 Jul 2017 01:15

How can LM put a condition of at least 100 aircraft before we do anything, and that is fine with the fanboys. But for LCA, why isn't HAL and ADA developing at speed. What nonsense?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4221
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 12 Jul 2017 06:25

nirav wrote:Mk2 is still being worked upon.
If ADA has enough bench strength to work on both mk2 and AMCA, all the power to them !


Not likely, based on what sjha and dileep are saying. LCA will become Hals baby. Neither iaf nor IN see interested in it.

But nothing to gnash teeth over....ADA will move to amca.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5810
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Dileep » 12 Jul 2017 06:47

Nothing against ppt. I myself show around a number of ppt products. The point is that everything except the engine is unclear. Also, very little funding and very little staffing.

Engine is "clear" for a reason :)

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 306
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby arvin » 12 Jul 2017 07:51

Dileep wrote:Aam-Ka is a ppt plane right now. There is a "team" but that have very few people, very little allocation etc. They draw different concepts and show it around. Meanwhile, some action is happening in researching key technologies such as FBL, VLO, Sensor fusion etc. That is what I gather from the chatter. Nothing is finalized, in fact there is nothing to finalize. Some of the MK2 "cool stuff" was supposed to mature into Aam-Ka.

Here is a rhetoric question: What if ADA is merged with HAL? Have anyone thought about it?


Fully support merging ADA with HAL. ADA should be merged with HAL-bangalore. Another design only institution NAL should be merged with HAL kanpur since kanpur has expertise in civilian planes. HAL itself should be split based on geographies.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8184
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Pratyush » 12 Jul 2017 07:57

Indranil wrote:How can LM put a condition of at least 100 aircraft before we do anything, and that is fine with the fanboys. But for LCA, why isn't HAL and ADA developing at speed. What nonsense?


How can you even ask this question. We all know that a domestic design cannot do the job. It received xyz numbers of permanent waivers from the IAF. That alone makes it unsuitable. Also, because it is domestic it needs no order's. It has to be produced without any orders from the IAF by the hundreds.

So I ask you again, how can you ask this question only.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby negi » 12 Jul 2017 08:05

On the contrary what needs to happen is folks working on LCA in HAL should be spawned off as a completely different entity along with relevant team from ADA ; they should directly work under the PMO and get a free hand with funds , decisions and men and material seek volunteers who want to leave cushy jobs and work for government on contract at market pay . Ambitious projects in private sector in tech happen in same way Netz used to do that , large cos do run their own pet projects under CTO office sure people in such projects get to enjoy fine things in life but by and large due to the investment and focus products do get delivered .

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4497
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 12 Jul 2017 09:36

Dileep wrote:Here is a rhetoric question: What if ADA is merged with HAL? Have anyone thought about it?


I have given some thought to this previously. May have evn expressed them on the SE MII thread. IMO the idea of merging Design house to Mfg house is great. They should be integrated. It is espcially important to have such set up in India where the design engineers have gross negligence/ignorance for manufacturability.

tsarkar wrote:
Dileep wrote:What if ADA is merged with HAL? Have anyone thought about it?

Very bad idea - design and manufacturing are two different sciences requiring adequate focus on each.

Mature organizations like Dassault or LM can ensure adequate focus on both but neither ADA nor HAL nor MoD has reached that maturity. ADA will lose whatever design capability it gained if swallowed by HAL.
BTW, HAL is actually trying that.


Tsarkar Sir, its not about handling capability or maturity. In fact the precise reason why we are generally bad at engineering is because we do not think design and manufacturing as one and the same thing. By merging the two we basically do 1+1=3. Because while the design and Mfg guys are suppose to still focus on own domain equally well, under single umbrella they tend to appreciate each other better which results in better design overall, where many issues are taken care at the design stage rather than waiting for feedback from Mfg after detailed design is started. The West is successful in modern engineering, if I may, is because they have much better appreciation for manufacturability of a design. Any design decision can be vetoed by manufacturing guys easily, if they feel its impractical to manufacture it. However this doesn't mean they only give importance to shop floor guys. They also stretch manufacturing capability limits for design, but albeit in small steps or in tech demonstrators or when they are flush with funds. Not on components which are critical from delivery/economic point of view. Some good example are - MiG-25 for which Russians invented SS welding processes and fabricated the entire fuselage as a single piece with welded joints. For Sr-71, Skunk-works invented plethora of Ti manufacturing processes because there was practically none existed before than but the plane had to be made with Ti fully. They had more Mfg engineers on the design team of Sr-71 than the "Design" engineers..! One has to follow 80:20 rule. 80% of the times go for the choice which is manufacturable with given capabilities. 20% times the manufacturing capability needs to upgrade itself to be able to make the chosen design choice. Similarly the design team as a whole has to work with the user where 80% design choices should be dictated by the user, while for rest 20%, the user may/could adapt its ways of working with the product. Incremental but continuous changes are essential in any technological advancement.

However, I was thinking, there is not a huge benefit of merging HAL and ADA. HAL already has decent design capability. It has financial muscle to develop it further and it has significant manufacturing experience. What is really needs is clear mandate from GOI and complete autonomy. LCA can be given totally to HAL with full freedom to develop it to whatever MKn they can and keep in contemporary for future.

I would say perhaps we should consider ADA merging with a pvt company who will set up manufacturing plant. AMCA could be handed over to this entity. GOI can own 49% stake in it to bankroll the initial investment. Suppose SE MII is coming anyway, whoever is doing it can be considered for merger with ADA. We could have two Fighter developers with us. Let the second one diversify in Civil Jets and HAL can keep Helicopters.

We also should not forget that ADA was formed as a separate entity 'almost' outside the purview of DRDO and as a "Society" to give it enough autonomy and keep it away from typical lethargy of a government organization. That's the reason ADA has been quite successful as an organization. But where the GOI went totally wrong is they made ADA as a toothless tiger. It has no authority over the agencies it subcontracts the work. It has to rely on good-will. It has no own financial muscles. Even as early as 1983-84 people realised this and were arguing that ADA will find it difficult to work like this. But GOI didn't pay heed. The demand for Department of Aerospace has been there since then. It would have bode well for the Nation if the government of the day has some common sense and it had created Dept of Aerospace on similar line of Dept of Space and Dept of Atomic Energy, working directly under PMO. That would have ensured autonomy and freedom from wishes and whims of MoD babus/mantris. Even now GOI can do this. This would help accelerate the growth of Aerospace in India. But GOI of current day also lack imagination, seems out of its depth and shows no will to make drastic changes.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1765
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 12 Jul 2017 10:30

JayS wrote:I would say perhaps we should consider ADA merging with a pvt company who will set up manufacturing plant. AMCA could be handed over to this entity. GOI can own 49% stake in it to bankroll the initial investment. Suppose SE MII is coming anyway, whoever is doing it can be considered for merger with ADA. We could have two Fighter developers with us. Let the second one diversify in Civil Jets and HAL can keep Helicopters.

^+108. ADA have currently built up some pretty good expertise in Aerospace design, systems integration and project management. Would save a prospective private company significant expense...But I have to mention that many of the capabilities ADA have currently is not in isolation but was built up working with various agencies. So the challenge of a private entity working with Govt institution will still remain but its a huge step in the right direction.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby rohitvats » 12 Jul 2017 10:44

Indranil wrote:Okay. I am back. I have been reading a lot of nonsense on this thread, but did not have time to respond. Time to take down the import pasand lobby here. If you post crap on this thread, be prepared to be called out.


What do you mean by 'import pasand lobby'?

The last person I expect to go around passing character certificate is a moderator. But then no wonder we've so much nonsense floating around here in the name of 'indigenous' development. From Air Chiefs being called as traitors to whole organization being called XYZ names. Everything goes in the name patriotism.

What next - anyone who does not agree with exact sentiment on LCA/indigenous program is a traitor? Some champions of 'domestic' development already paste that label on others.

Its a short step away for you - from labeling others as 'import pasand lobby' to 'traitors'.

Some evolution of BRF!!!

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 12 Jul 2017 11:07

F-16 domestic assembly is just a glide path to JSF assembly once khan is ready for 6th gen ucavs around 2030.

in between the tejas mk1 will be capped, tejas mk2 scrapped and amca trickle funded in the well-honed away to a slow death as it would not be on par with a JSF offered on a silver plate.

my personal view is PMO is not unaware of all these, but wants some 20 yrs of "safeguarded" economic growth (with the dlagon and tsp kept away) to fill the basic gaps in the economy (lack of roads, toilets, healthcare, deplorable avg quality of higher education(the loud noises of the MUTU iitians notwithstanding)) and for this is willing to pay "protection money" to khan and russia the P2 goondas if that is what it takes.

PMO has to think for future of the whole country and balance a lot of tradeoffs as there is no path which guarantees success on all fronts with least risk. its a unsolvable optimization problem that will never converge.

on the surface if F-solah comes through, that is my pov.

whether these 15-20 yrs makes us grow into a south korea remains to be seen. south korea despite being a khan munna has advanced arms industries as seen in t50, samsung techwin, shipbuilding etc. perhaps the idea is increase the base technology level of our manufacturing so that future projects do not need to reinvent the wheel on every front and has COTS providers in pvt and govt sector like lockheed and boeing can call in..and also established channels into subsystem suppliers to the global biggies. the OECD nations even the smallish ones like italy and spain are far superior in materials sc and machine tools to india - some are SME but operate at high tech levels and globally competitive products for some decades now, Cheen has been the worlds largest importer of machine tools, while India has claimed the dubious throne of the largest importer of finished weapons.

in the soft power and aspirational front, the world is already a khan munna barring north korea. even the best iranian students aspire to go nowhere else but khan.

someone must have assessed that even if we are given all the blueprints and raw materials of a JSF there is no domestic base to manufacture it to those tolerances. just take the quality and packaging of a 100 random consumer products in a shop here and compare to khanate, germany or japan. at the low end, our consumer products are really bad and do not meet safety or quality stds anywhere, let alone packaging and "iphone tight looks"

a VAST ocean of SME has to rise by a few feet in this manthan for 15-20 yrs. Namo has dived under the ocean and will keep low profile as he seeks to shift tectonic plates to create a "tsunamo" (pun intended)

a economy that cannot domestically manufacture large electronics and machinery to global standards with own IP is not ready to be a major defence innovator. else we would be like soviet union -a superpawa in aerospace but importing TVs from korea and exporting POL and minerals to the world. infact we already are in a way. we export iron ore to korea and japan factories and take deep pride in our 55" samsung/LG tvs and honda cars.

the journey to greatness starts with looking in mirror and honestly admitting weak areas.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4213
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby chola » 12 Jul 2017 13:03

Indranil wrote:
chola wrote:We are in this depressing spiral because we cannot productionize an indigenous design.

It all comes down to the following: either ADA could not design LCA of proper specs with domestic parts or HAL and its network of suppliers, after decades of MiGs and SUs, still don't have the ability to mass produce components needed for LCA.

In either case, the PSUs are not working. Let's give Tata and the private sector a try now. If it is too late for the LCA, please let the private sector in early on AMCA at least.

Stop this nonsense. HAL has firm orders for 40 aircraft. According to plan it was supposed to produce 6 aircraft this year. It is moddle of the year and it has delivered 3. 4th to be delivered very soon.


EXACTLY. Six this year. MaPar (when he was still around) said way back we should be getting 8 a year and then 16.

For an indigenous product with first flight SIXTEEN years ago in 2001, we should be happy with 6 in 2017?!

MoD pretty much ordered 123 LCAs in 2015. MoD and IAF had supported HAL and its network with solid orders.

Sorry, as a nation we can do far better. Give the private sector a shot.

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 12 Jul 2017 13:13

+ to my post above.

there are two other weaknesses that are easier to fix than lifting the sea by a few feet that I outlined above.

#1 why is ESA,dassault,EADS,snecma all "govt owned munnas with a easy french work culture" able to deliver world class products while our govt owned do not?
the reason they are only govt owned in the sense of govt having golden shares, a veto on stake sales and govt giving them cash as needed. so they are govt funded but not owned.
they can hire and fire as they need, collaborate with anyone, work with anyone without the tired failed circus of global tendering via MOD and umpteen rounds of desks to clear files.

DRDO/CSIR/HAL etc need to spun off as such entities and let them do as they wish, pay market rates, hire lateral hires, hire foreigners whatever needs to get done to deliver. this is probably what Embraer is also doing and so are the China national weapons and aerospace industry - they are heavily funded and they are producing real results all over the place. sarkari payscale, low process, hardly any organizational flexibility and tired old leadership looking to retire in place is hardly going to inspire outside people to aspire to get in.

#2 is there some mutation in the indic gene that prevents us from organizing large scale manufacturing even as east asian cultures are able to organize like a disciplined army of ants? the jury is out of that.
part of the reason why tejas is tough to manufacture is because for most of the team it was their first design and they had no exp to fall back on and books to read.

if you ask a fresh programmer to code in a new language he has just learnt, the code will work but may not be maintainable. design for maintainability is also a science and operational art which the likes of aerospace majors, toyota, honda are able to follow due to vast exp. there is no substitute to doing many many projects and learning from each failure. one off "golden" projects like AMCA are not a good vehicle, there must be masses of smaller projects for teams to keep working on.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4213
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby chola » 12 Jul 2017 13:30

#1 why is ESA,dassault,EADS,snecma all "govt owned munnas with a easy french work culture" able to deliver world class products while our govt owned do not?


They are gora and we are not. They have gora infrastructure and gora processes and gora accountability. You put desis in the same environmental soup (like NRIs in Sillycon Valley) we will prosper in the same way. Full stop.

Indian private sector because of global competition is closer to gora standards.

Closer but I don't expect miracles since the French also have sexy gori wives and girlfriends to go back to every day that invigorates them greatly.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4213
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby chola » 12 Jul 2017 13:40

#2 is there some mutation in the indic gene that prevents us from organizing large scale manufacturing even as east asian cultures are able to organize like a disciplined army of ants? the jury is out of that.
part of the reason why tejas is tough to manufacture is because for most of the team it was their first design and they had no exp to fall back on and books to read.


Well, techniquely it is our second after Marut. So is institutional knowledge retained in Bharat? It might not be a genetic factor but a cultural one.

East Asian (Confucian) culture prize obedience and uniformity for a functioning society of teeming humans. Dharmic culture focuses on the individual and his internal spiritual well being. We cannot be ants.

Our best approach is the free market which approximates the gora environment. We need the private sector.

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 12 Jul 2017 14:04

>>Closer but I don't expect miracles since the French also have sexy gori wives and girlfriends to go back to every day that invigorates them greatly.

:rotfl: the exact same thought had struck me as i was having lunch. so they will be a notch above. but we could compete with our east asian biraders under a more gorafied regime for lack of a better phrase.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests