LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

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.
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4554
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby JayS » 20 Dec 2017 13:04

Kartik wrote:LCA AF Mk2 variant - the most details that we've got so far, from ADA's 31st Annual Report for 2015-2016. Next year's report will reveal what has transpired with relation to the LCA AF Mk2 variant in 2017.

LCA AF Mk2
<snip>
The changes in NMG have resulted in drag reduction and increase in fuel content by about 20kg. These improvements are going to result in improved point and mission performance.
<snip>
Aerodynamics : A number of aerodynamics improvements have been carried out to reduce drag and improve performance:
• Drag reduction studies have been completed. Canopy reshaping, outer cowl modification, actuator fairing extension and supersonic pylons have resulted in approx 20 counts (8%) drag reduction in supersonic regimes.
• Wind Tunnel studies have been completed.
• Aero loads computations have been completed.
<snip>


Increase of only 20kg..? What exactly they are referring to here..? Increase in existing fuel tanks only..?

Also, data point for LCA drag - 20 counts reduction ~ 8% >> baseline drag must be ~250 counts. But its not clear whether they are talking about only supersonic wave drag or total drag. I suppose its the former.

Another figure was mentioned in the Canopy optimization paper from one of the conferences.

http://www.nal.res.in/CFDsympo17/cfdful ... rcraft.pdf

50kg fuel increase and 12 count reduction (~6%) in supersonic wave drag due to canopy reshaping. Which means other 8 counts is due to other factors mentioned above. The 12 counts reduction had increased transonic acceleration by 20%, so total of 20 counts would increase it even further, may be by >30%.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby shiv » 20 Dec 2017 13:39

Cybaru wrote:
shiv wrote:"Lo Lo Lo in the past", "combat is risky and should not be risky" are all USA versus useless air forces.


If the mighty usaf can't clean against useless forces and stays away from going fast and lo, what makes you think it will work against our sophisticated enemies?


It means that the IAF will take losses and fight. This presumption that the US did something and the IAF is duty bound to follow is a classic social media trope I find among Indians but the IAF knows that there will be dangerous missions but the payoff is high especially if we fight a serious war where objectives are met with troops on the ground and not nonserious timepass wars like the US hitting by air only and not putting any troops on the ground and not achieving any serious objectives after decades of war against ragtag enemies. The US wants no (or few) soldiers killed, puts very few on the ground and wants minimum attrition in decades of war. We read than and think that this is the future of war. Amreeki hawa.

Too many of our discussions are clouded by what the US does and not what the Indian forces have done and nee d to do under our unique circumstances. We harbour a genuine belief that is perfectly illustrated by your comment that if the mighty US can't do something we who are useless can't hope to do anything different. As a people we have high regard for the US and low regard for our own people and will have a series of arguments to show why that is true.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Cybaru » 20 Dec 2017 13:55

In my experience it is ok to observe and learn. Isn't thats the reason we send observers and take part in exchanges and exercises? I will refrain from responding to rest of your observations and biases.. nothing to do with LCA range discussion.

IAF startegy already changed when it lost mi17 and mig21 to manpads during kargil. It took precautions and changed how low it flew and how it responded to the situation following those events.

Coming back to the discussion at hand, if my assumption that lo lo lo has fallen out of favor with IAf, then LCAs range is more than adequate for Western sector...

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12423
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Aditya_V » 20 Dec 2017 14:05

I think Lo Lo Lo is ruled out in LOC and Mountain areas, not in the plains. Also by now we should along with automatic flares(probably require MAWS and sensors that the aircraft is being targeted) installed in all aircraft unlike in 1999. Hope we have install Lasers and other technology which can divert Manpads.'

Again in lo lo lo AAA is more of a danger since the target will be too fast for MANPAD to correctly aim, get seeker lock and launch in the right direction before target is out of range, for helicopters with their lower speed this logic will not apply. They will really of dazzlers and other diversion aids.

And if rockets are goign to be used, I hope we have developed Laser guided versions like the Lase guided Zuni


Nitesh
BRFite
Posts: 902
Joined: 23 Mar 2008 22:22
Location: Bangalore
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Nitesh » 20 Dec 2017 18:18

Some details coming for LCA MK1A, tender issued for 60k cr

https://twitter.com/manjeetnegilive?ref ... 5004953600

milindc
BRFite
Posts: 722
Joined: 11 Feb 2006 00:03

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby milindc » 20 Dec 2017 18:46

#IAF issues request for proposal to HAL for procurement of 83 #Tejas light combat aircraft: Official sources (PTI)

https://twitter.com/EconomicTimes/statu ... 5320913920

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2444
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Manish_P » 20 Dec 2017 18:52

Tsk tsk Look how non supportive is the IAF :)

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 20 Dec 2017 18:55

shiv wrote:
Cybaru wrote:
If the mighty usaf can't clean against useless forces and stays away from going fast and lo, what makes you think it will work against our sophisticated enemies?


It means that the IAF will take losses and fight. This presumption that the US did something and the IAF is duty bound to follow is a classic social media trope I find among Indians but the IAF knows that there will be dangerous missions but the payoff is high especially if we fight a serious war where objectives are met with troops on the ground and not nonserious timepass wars like the US hitting by air only and not putting any troops on the ground and not achieving any serious objectives after decades of war against ragtag enemies. The US wants no (or few) soldiers killed, puts very few on the ground and wants minimum attrition in decades of war. We read than and think that this is the future of war. Amreeki hawa.

Too many of our discussions are clouded by what the US does and not what the Indian forces have done and nee d to do under our unique circumstances. We harbour a genuine belief that is perfectly illustrated by your comment that if the mighty US can't do something we who are useless can't hope to do anything different. As a people we have high regard for the US and low regard for our own people and will have a series of arguments to show why that is true.


You make a good point. But my sense is that these are all comments only by dabblers who don't know much and see discovery channel and US 'war movies', few NRIs. In fact when you speak to a normal bharatwasi, who sometimes come into contact with their forces in various ways, they are not in awe of US - probably don't watch CNN or discovery channel and know a Rambo movie is just a movie ! BRF is not always reflective of Indian society and certainly not of armed forces so don't worry exactly what you say will happen - Jags will be used to max effecinecy.

Now lets go back to LCA pls.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karthik S » 20 Dec 2017 19:45

US never fought for it's existence, even during WW2, it's main land was never under threat of invasion or occupation. All our wars has been fighting to defend the country and most likely to remain the same in the future. When you are fighting for your existence, your mindset will be vastly different regarding risk taking.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby shiv » 20 Dec 2017 20:05

Please pardon my OT. Akshay it is worse than that. In fact even the US is infected with a mindset that describes itself as "humanity" where it is stated that if war is fought there must be no (own) losses. This basically started after Vietnam but has now reached a point where the US fights sanitized wars against enemies that can be hit from far away with few losses. The attitude has moved into high gear now with demands that "Now that war is so safe and sanitized - let there be equal opportunity - let women into every role including special forces, and make way for quotas of LGBT. These are the attitudes that are visible in the mainstream (MSM) and social (SM)

So the "techniques of Amreeki war" in the popular media space are "Hit from far away. Planes fly out of reach. Use cruise missiles. Everything long distance. Don't fly low near the enemy. You will get shot down. No need for men on the ground. That is oh so yesterday.."

This is all fine if you are hitting Taliban, Saddam's troops or ISIS and your own men are not on the ground slugging it out.

I find it obnoxious to come onto a discussion group and find people saying "Helos will get shot down. they must stay far away. Planes will get shot down they must stay far away". This is correct if you are simply hitting ISIS from far away. But if your brothers in the army are on the ground - under fire from a medium machine pinned down and taking casualties and need air force help the IAF is not going to say
    1. We won't use rockets because that will put us at risk
    2. We won't use helicopters because they will get shot down
    3. We won't overfly the area where our men are being shot to pieces because our planes will get shot down
    4. We should consider one Brahmos to be fired from 300 km away. All of us will be safe and doing just like Amerikaa
    5. Or let us see if there is drone available. Oh our import pasand air force has not bought the right drones and our inefficient DRDO has not produced drones

The IAF is going to get out there and kick the shit out of the enemy on the ground. They will take risks if need be, They are brave. Not stupid. they also value their lives> They also want to live like you and me, but they value the lives of their countrymen also and don't have time for social media gyan from Amreeka

How do I know? Read histories of Indian battles, instead of watching videos of American battles where all this shit is picked up.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby tsarkar » 20 Dec 2017 20:14

shiv wrote:And at 900 kmph no one hears the plane till it is almost overhead and it has passed before one can aim a camera - let alone a manpad.


Very bad example comparing planes at transit speed over houses with planes at attack speed deploying weapons.

Planes in transit fly at 900 kmph, hence they fly at high speed over people's houses. Because they're in transit and not attack mode. MANPADS are useless targeting planes in transit.

Before attack, they may make slow speed circuits of the target to judge the best approach for targets of opportunity. For pre decided targets, the approach is decided during mission planning.

While attacking, they slow down to lase the target and ensure the LGB falls in the bucket of reflected laser cone so that it hits the target.

For conventional bombs, the laser rangefinder in chisel nose of MiG-27/Jaguar (check the small laser transparent windows in their nose) or the laser rangefinder of litening pod gathers the range and the weapons computer calculates Continuously Computed Release Point/Continuously Computed Impact Point (CCRP/CCIP) and for that process to effectively work, an aircraft cannot fly fast. To ensure the target is lased, the aircraft flies in a predictable path as well.

For rockets, the range is very low. The aircraft has to close in to targets and fly a predictable flight path

MANPADS use that precise timeframe and flight path when strike aircraft are releasing weapons as their engagement envelope.

Image

Image

https://www.ada.gov.in/images/IOC%20con ... 0Final.pdf
1000 LB bombs in CCRP/CCIP modes completed


Ajay Ahuja was doing slow speed circuits trying to spot Nachiketa visually when hit by a Stinger.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby tsarkar » 20 Dec 2017 20:31

shiv wrote:...IAF is not going to say
1. We won't use rockets because that will put us at risk
2. We won't use helicopters because they will get shot down


Well, on the contrary, this is what IAF specifically said 20 years ago in 1999

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 057998.ece

The Army top brass kept saying they could handle the situation but insisted the Air Force should provide helicopter gunships to support ground troops a request Air Chief Marshal Tipnis turned down several times as he felt helicopters would be vulnerable to missile attacks and the use of air power would lead to an escalation in a conflict.


A helicopter and crew had to be needlessly sacrificed to prove the point.

No helicopters or rockets were used in Kargil after Mi-17 shootdown

No low level bombing, gun run or rocket run happened in Kargil after Ajay Ahuja and Nachiketa shootdown.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby shiv » 20 Dec 2017 20:46

tsarkar wrote:A helicopter and crew had to be needlessly sacrificed to prove the point.

No helicopters or rockets were used in Kargil after Mi-17 shootdown

No low level bombing, gun run or rocket run happened in Kargil after Ajay Ahuja and Nachiketa shootdown.

Sir please don't forget that Kargil had the entire air force at its disposal. If we get into a hot war a place like Kargil would get about 2 planes and whatever they have in terms of weapons. Kargil front was so limited and yet the air force used
    Mi-17
    MiG 21
    MiG 25
    MiG 27
    Mirage 2000
    MiG 29
    Canberra

Are you seriously trying to say that the IAF will have so many assets to spare in hot war, Your example is not good enough. Kargil was a limited skirmish. Not war. The IAF could pick and choose and even when they could pick and choose they used helos and lost one. And when they used aircraft they lost 2 and a third a Canberra was hit. Tactics were developed AFTER the threats revealed themselves. And the IAF did not go into Pakistan as they would have to in hot war. This is true for all wars we have fought - which I am sure you will know from your vast and detailed knowledge of military history.

When the Pakistani Atlantique was shot down the helicopters that went to retrieve evidence were shot at by manpads. You know that I presume. The IAF did not say "hey that is the border area. We will be at risk. We won't go". When there is a rescue mission to pick up a downed pilot or a casualty - the IAF does not say "It is risky. We will needlessly get shot down". You being a respected senior retired naval officer probably know all this much better than I do.

fyi
viewtopic.php?p=1121533#p1121533
Vishnu wrote:There have been another few crazy conflict type situations I have found myself in. The craziest one was being in a Mi-8 hepter which was shot at by Pak forces with a SAM the day after the PAF Atlantique was shot down in Gujarat. Fukushima and Sendai this year were pretty scary as well .. Will write on that soon ... Cheers.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 20 Dec 2017 20:51

T Sarkar sir, wrong to extrapolate from Kargil and absolutely wrong to say a helicopter and its crew was sacrificed. Unfortunate comment. The tactics of this operation have been discussed in a different thread. Deejay can give you a good perspective. IAF will not stop fighting because it has casualties and neither will the navy. Its a question of balancing the risk and that can't be discussed by a few keystrokes. Please take this discussion to an appropriate thread. Indian Military Aviation perhaps is the better home for it.

We need to move back to LCA here. No more posts on this here pls.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2487
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby manjgu » 20 Dec 2017 21:10

a) The Jag fulfill a certain role in IAF and the crew train for that.. if there are threats in the lo lo lo..arent there threats in hi hi hi or any mix of lo's and hi's? the crew train to minimise the risks associated with their role.. and survive with tactics, electronics and a prayer ! in a fluid battle situation, its not that all assets move under a cover of MANPADS or AD 24*7... the lo lo lo has still many + s to it. b) the kargil example was not too good..the COAS in a specific situation said that not good to bring in hepters... with fellas sitting on high peaks..looking down ..hepter not optimised for high altitude combat... But probably something was to be done and under Army presure, persistence hepters were brought in ( in that sense it was un necessary sacrifice much against IAF's professional opinion). From what i have read the hepter which went down was not equipped with protection suite unlike the other 3 or 4 who had such a protection suite. it was not like PA fired only 1 stinger which shot the hepter down. c) in the mountains during kargil IAF had very fixed lines of attack given the constraints of not crossing LOC....in a war in the plains of punjab, rajasthan this predicitability will be much less more in a fluid battle situation.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 20 Dec 2017 21:15

Manjgu Sir excellent points. I will cross posted in Indian Military Aviation. Let the discussion carry on there.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby tsarkar » 20 Dec 2017 21:22

mod note - moved post to Indian Military Aviation. Pls carry on the discussion there.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby deejay » 20 Dec 2017 21:29

Moved Post to Indian Military Aviation thread

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 560
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ashishvikas » 20 Dec 2017 22:16

Rightly said by Shiv Aroor.

Perplexing tweets by many claiming the LCA Tejas tender is a ‘huge boost’ to the indigenous program. The tender is merely a procedural transition from the indent for 83 Mk1A jets decided by the IAF a couple of years ago.

The 123 aircraft (20 IOC + 20 FOC + 83 Mk1A) are a mix of orders or indents, so this was captive anyway. A ‘huge boost’, therefore, would be to any orders/indents beyond these 123 aircraft.

A ‘huge boost’ would therefore be an alignment of requirements and progress on the Mk1A (and perhaps the Mk2) to compel greater numbers beyond 123. It is important that happens.


https://twitter.com/livefist/status/943497999182733313

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/943498015490244613

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3547
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby fanne » 20 Dec 2017 22:22

But now from intent (or is it indent), 83 is a formal contract (i.e. a order) for HAL to execute. It is a milestone. Now no one will complain that IAF has intent to buys 83 but not placed firm orders. It did today. I have follow on question - what happened for this step to be taken, did LCA achieve some internal milestone? Or was it practical decision (perhaps tied to Guj election, NDA now feels second term uncertain and want IAF to commit to LCA so that UPA-3 does not cancel it?)

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 560
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ashishvikas » 20 Dec 2017 22:25

^^ Still, it's not an order.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1851
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby sudeepj » 20 Dec 2017 22:51

Has HAL made progress towards shaving off 800 kgs off of the MK1 for the MK1-A? There was also some news about Thales developing an RBE2 variant specifically for the LCA MK1-A, perhaps as a part of the offsets for the Rafale deal.

If these pieces come together, LCA will be transformed into a superlative fighter that will be able to take on anything our rivals can throw at us. A super electronics package along with a great TWR and a reliable engine. It will do better than legacy single engine light fighters such as the F16.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8103
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby nachiket » 21 Dec 2017 00:22

sudeepj wrote:Has HAL made progress towards shaving off 800 kgs off of the MK1 for the MK1-A? There was also some news about Thales developing an RBE2 variant specifically for the LCA MK1-A, perhaps as a part of the offsets for the Rafale deal.

If these pieces come together, LCA will be transformed into a superlative fighter that will be able to take on anything our rivals can throw at us. A super electronics package along with a great TWR and a reliable engine. It will do better than legacy single engine light fighters such as the F16.

Mk1A will not be 800kg lighter. I think that was some misreporting by the media. I made the mistake of believing it myself and even criticized HAL for making fanciful claims. But I don't think HAL has actually made such a claim.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1851
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby sudeepj » 21 Dec 2017 00:28

A jingo can hope :-) Its not completely unbelievable, at least a few hundred kgs can be shaved off the landing gear and if new technologies (co-cured wing) are adopted. I heard that the landing gear was adopted from the Jaguar, and can likely be improved upon using newer materials. The co-cured wing has also been bandied about earlier.. NAL is making some large cocured structures for the LCA already.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 21 Dec 2017 00:36

It is a huge milestone. Even last month the HAL chairman was not sure of IAF plans beyond the 20 (IOC) + 20 (FOC) orders in place.

IAF has shown its commitment to LCA Mk1A. And that's a great step.
Aroor can think what he wants. Not like he is last word on military aviation.

Also KaranM , there were news reports the new RM had decided to clear the long standing DAC decisions to support the forces re-equipment.

Guess I am disappointed that senior members discuss on two pages Jaguars in the LCA thread and even after admins suggest not to do so.

Especially when the IAF has issued the RFP for such a big order for the LCA Mk1A.

Going on and on about a 40 year old British toothless plane is not good.

it was IAF that improved it with DARIN upgrades.

Please have focus.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Kartik » 21 Dec 2017 00:48

JayS wrote:
Kartik wrote:LCA AF Mk2 variant - the most details that we've got so far, from ADA's 31st Annual Report for 2015-2016. Next year's report will reveal what has transpired with relation to the LCA AF Mk2 variant in 2017.



Increase of only 20kg..? What exactly they are referring to here..? Increase in existing fuel tanks only..?

Also, data point for LCA drag - 20 counts reduction ~ 8% >> baseline drag must be ~250 counts. But its not clear whether they are talking about only supersonic wave drag or total drag. I suppose its the former.

Another figure was mentioned in the Canopy optimization paper from one of the conferences.

http://www.nal.res.in/CFDsympo17/cfdful ... rcraft.pdf

50kg fuel increase and 12 count reduction (~6%) in supersonic wave drag due to canopy reshaping. Which means other 8 counts is due to other factors mentioned above. The 12 counts reduction had increased transonic acceleration by 20%, so total of 20 counts would increase it even further, may be by >30%.


No no, it was just an increase in 20kg of fuel carried as a result of suggestions made during PDR. The overall increase will be significantly more than that, since one of the stated goals of the Tejas Mk2 was to increase range and endurance.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Kartik » 21 Dec 2017 01:16

sudeepj wrote:Has HAL made progress towards shaving off 800 kgs off of the MK1 for the MK1-A? There was also some news about Thales developing an RBE2 variant specifically for the LCA MK1-A, perhaps as a part of the offsets for the Rafale deal.

If these pieces come together, LCA will be transformed into a superlative fighter that will be able to take on anything our rivals can throw at us. A super electronics package along with a great TWR and a reliable engine. It will do better than legacy single engine light fighters such as the F16.


Again and again I keep hearing about 800 kgs weight reduction on Mk1A. What is the definitive source for this?! ADA is on record as stating that weight reduction studies were initiated for the Tejas Mk2, but for the Mk1A, there is no such definitive source.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Kartik » 21 Dec 2017 01:21

Can't believe the BRF thread is so silent on this. Finally a RFP was issued to HAL by the IAF for 73 Mk1As and 10 twin seat trainers at FOC SOP. This is a red letter day, the conversion of Acceptance of Necessity to a formal RFP, which will then translate to a formal order if HAL doesn't give an exorbitant quote. This quote will include the development costs for the Mk1A which IAF will probably share with HAL.

link

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 20

The Indian Air Force has formally asked the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to submit its proposal for making 83 additional Tejas fighter jets.

Of these, 73 will be the upgraded version called the ‘Mark-1A’ and 10 will be the trainer version – a twin seat version– that will be as per specifications allowed in the variant okayed for existing final operational clearance (FOC). The HAL will submit its proposal within 90 days that is by March next year.


HAL is already making 40 Tejas jets as per the FOC standards set by the IAF.

At present pace, the Mark 1-A can first be ready for first flight by 2019.


The Tribune had first reported on November 14 how the Ministry of Defence (MoD) was clearing the hurdles to the project and was more interested in ‘Make in India’ project of the light combat aircraft, Tejas.

On November 7 last year, the Defence Acquisition Council, chaired by then Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, approved the procurement of 83 planes of the ‘Mark1-A’ version. But a formal order is yet to be placed. It was almost two years ago, in December 2015, that the IAF indicated the requirement of 100 Tejas LCA MK 1-A aircraft, for which a formal order is yet to be placed. The plan of manufacturing and completion is from 2018 to 2022-23.

The seeking of proposal from HAL, an MoD owned public sector undertaking, is the first step towards getting these jets.

There are 123 Tejas jets – in two variants — that the MoD is looking at. Forty planes of the base version have been ordered and are under production. The Mark 1-A version will have 43 upgrades over the base version.

The IAF wants AESA radar in place of the manually scanned Israeli Elta radar. Besides it wants a ‘self-protection jammer’, fitted with external re-fuelling capability.

Besides, the MoD has Rs 1,331-crore plan to double the existing eight planes per annum capacity of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 21 Dec 2017 01:43

Kartik wrote:

Can't believe the BRF thread is so silent on this. Finally a RFP was issued to HAL by the IAF for 73 Mk1As and 10 twin seat trainers at FOC SOP. This is a red letter day, the conversion of Acceptance of Necessity to a formal RFP, which will then translate to a formal order if HAL doesn't give an exorbitant quote. This quote will include the development costs for the Mk1A which IAF will probably share with HAL.

link

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 20

The Indian Air Force has formally asked the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to submit its proposal for making 83 additional Tejas fighter jets.

Of these, 73 will be the upgraded version called the ‘Mark-1A’ and 10 will be the trainer version – a twin seat version– that will be as per specifications allowed in the variant okayed for existing final operational clearance (FOC). The HAL will submit its proposal within 90 days that is by March next year.


HAL is already making 40 Tejas jets as per the FOC standards set by the IAF.

At present pace, the Mark 1-A can first be ready for first flight by 2019.


The Tribune had first reported on November 14 how the Ministry of Defence (MoD) was clearing the hurdles to the project and was more interested in ‘Make in India’ project of the light combat aircraft, Tejas.

On November 7 last year, the Defence Acquisition Council, chaired by then Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, approved the procurement of 83 planes of the ‘Mark1-A’ version. But a formal order is yet to be placed. It was almost two years ago, in December 2015, that the IAF indicated the requirement of 100 Tejas LCA MK 1-A aircraft, for which a formal order is yet to be placed. The plan of manufacturing and completion is from 2018 to 2022-23.

The seeking of proposal from HAL, an MoD owned public sector undertaking, is the first step towards getting these jets.

There are 123 Tejas jets – in two variants — that the MoD is looking at. Forty planes of the base version have been ordered and are under production. The Mark 1-A version will have 43 upgrades over the base version.

The IAF wants AESA radar in place of the manually scanned Israeli Elta radar. Besides it wants a ‘self-protection jammer’, fitted with external re-fuelling capability.

Besides, the MoD has Rs 1,331-crore plan to double the existing eight planes per annum capacity of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited
.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 21 Dec 2017 01:49

90 days reply to RFP means all the Mk1A changes are ready to be put in place.
And 2019 for first flight is good.

Does this ensure no production gap at HAL?

I think the two year delay was to ensure its ready to be ordered.


Also 10 two-seater planes in the RFP means the SOP is now frozen.

Any idea what the 43 upgrades to Mk1 FOC are?


Elta radar is mechanically scanned not manually scanned.


The MoD Rs 1331 crore budget to double the line capacity from 8 to 16 planes/year includes the Hawk assy line or is this a new line?

I note the HAL earlier said Rs. 1231 crore for the assy line with half coming from HAL and rest from Air Force and Navy. With the Navy bowing out, are they still committed to allocate for this mfg line?

One can expect the Mk2 to be the SEF and that order to be about 90 (126-36) planes.

---
However a cautionary note. The order says 73 Mk1A and 10 Trainers. Is this a cut back of 10 Mk1A?
I thought the requirement was always for 83 Mk1As.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 21 Dec 2017 01:59

Kartik wrote:LCA AF Mk2 variant - the most details that we've got so far, from ADA's 31st Annual Report for 2015-2016. Next year's report will reveal what has transpired with relation to the LCA AF Mk2 variant in 2017.

Clearly, a lot of work has already been done on the LCA AF Mk2 and it is obvious that this should be the way to go ahead, for the LCA program and for the IAF to have a large fleet of single engine fighters. Rather than looking at short cuts by importing the Gripen E, which seems to have been the ideal template for a single engine light/medium fighter for the IAF.

LCA AF Mk2
Background : LCA AF Mk 2 was conceived as the performance of LCA AF Mk1 was found inadequate with GEF404-IN20 engine The scope of FSED Phase 3 as per project sanction is as follows:-
Design, develop and build two aircraft with
• New Engine
• Necessary changes in the structure and systems to integrate the new engine
• Weight reduction to improve performance
• Unified EW Suite (UEWS)
• Development of new DFCC, its test facilities and integration
• Upgrade/modification/maintenance of test facilities.

Additional Scope:
Extensive studies were carried out at ADA to make suitable changes in LCA AF Mk2 to address the maintainability issues observed in LCA AF Mk1, improve the systems like fuel, landing gear and brakes, electrical, armament etc. Also a number of new/upgraded systems have been incorporated to make the aircraft more contemporary. As a result, the scope for FSED Phase 3 increased substantially due to extensive changes incorporated to have an improved aircraft with improved performance in all aspects.
Important new/ upgrades of systems are listed below:
• Introduction of 500mm plug in fuselage
• Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar
• On Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS)
• New Cockpit with larger size smart displays
• One Mission Management and Display Computer (MMDC) in place of two Open Architecture Computers
• HMDS based on optical sensor
• Smart HUD with improved Field of Vision
• Higher power Jet Fuel Starter
• Servo controlled Airbrake under the command of DFCC control
• Pressurized Fuel System
• Unified Pylon Interface Computer (UPIC) in place of individual Pylon Interface Boxes
• Combined Interrogator Transponder (CIT)
• Indigenous Actuators
• NVG compatible lighting

Activities Carried out:
Presently, the configuration of LCA AF Mk2 has been frozen with all the design improvements and Preliminary Design Review (PDR) has been carried out in June 2014 and detail design is in
progress.
GE-F414 engine was selected as the higher thrust engine for LCA AF Mk2 and a contract was signed with M/s GE, USA in September 2012. The CDR of alternate engine has been completed. Engine is undergoing final qualification and lifing evaluation tests.

Milestones Achieved:
Following milestones have been achieved:
• Configuration freeze
• Engine contract finalization
• In-board and NMG freeze
• PDR

Progress of Design and Development
Activities:
10.5.1 Configuration & NMG:
The configuration of LCA AF Mk2 has been frozen. The Numerical Master Geometry (NMG) has been revised based on recommendations of PDR Committee to improve performance.
The changes in NMG have resulted in drag reduction and increase in fuel content by about 20kg. These improvements are going to result in improved point and mission performance.

Inboards & Layout: The inboards have been finalized addressing the accessibility and maintainability issues observed in LCA Mk1.
• Layouts preparation is in progress.
• The station wise mass distribution is under finalisation.

Aerodynamics : A number of aerodynamics improvements have been carried out to reduce drag and improve performance:
• Drag reduction studies have been completed. Canopy reshaping, outer cowl modification, actuator fairing extension and supersonic pylons have resulted in approx 20 counts (8%) drag reduction in supersonic regimes.
• Wind Tunnel studies have been completed.
• Aero loads computations have been completed.

Airframe:
• Three door AAID finalised.
• BMI material developed for high temperature applications.
• Composite pipelines developed for ECS.
• Spine widened for providing accessibility and maintainability.
• Pilot step provided for pilot's emergency egress.
• SPS bay redesigned to improve maintainability.

Engine:
• Aircraft engine bay ventilation scheme has been finalised.
• Engine-Airframe Interface Control Diagram (ICD) has been prepared.
• Aircraft Qualification Tests have been completed
• ASMET (Aircraft Simulated Mission Endurance Tests) results are under discussion.
• New JFS with higher torque GTSU-135 is under development.

Mechanical Systems:
• Layouts preparation and detail design is in progress.
• Feasibility to increase wheel size for increasing the capacity of brake system are in progress.
• Trials to offload one hydraulic system to reduce the load on JFS during starting are going on. This will help in cold weather high altitude operations.
• Liquid Cooling System configurations, separate for AESA and UEWS have been finalised.
• Studies to shift the Air to Air refueling probe to right are in progress to obviate probe coming in Field of View of Head Up Display (HUD).

Integrated Flight Control System:
• DFCC: CDR completed. Realization of QT unit by 31st Dec 2016.
• Indigenous Actuators: Primary Actuators QT completed, Iron Bird testing completed. Being evaluated on LCA Mk1. Secondary Actuators under development. Air worthy units will be available by December 2016.

Avionics:
• Avionics architecture has been finalised.
• New cockpit with bigger size (6”x8”) displays has been designed.
• Development of new LRUs is in progress.
Avionics will be ready by Dec 2018.
• Configuration of Active Phased Array based Unified Electronic Warfare Suite (UEWS) finalised.
• The number of elements that can be incorporated with the existing geometry for the Antenna Array unit of AESA Radar has been finalized and performance parameters like range and Effective Radiated Power (ERP) computed.
• Night Vision Goggle (NVG) compatible LED lights for Navigation lights and Taxi / Landing Lights are being developed. Engineering models have been developed. Performance is being evaluated.
• Conformal antenna developed for V/UHF.

Interdisciplinary Studies:

Following studies are in progress to bring out improvements in design:
• LCA AF Mk2 cockpit assessment for new anthropometric data received from IAF is in progress.
• Thermal mapping studies of aircraft are in progress.
• New installation scheme in Avionics Bay for better accessibility /maintainability is under finalisation.
• Rationalisation of drop tanks is in progress to reduce variety of drop tanks.
• Electrical modeling of LCA AF Mk2 to study indirect effect of lightning is in progress at IISc, Bangalore.
Studies to bring out necessary changes in LRUs to have Push-fit type connectors for quick removal/fitment of the same have been completed.
• Weight reduction studies have been carried out and design improvements required to reduce weight have been identified.



Quite a lot of progress on LCA Mk2 development program.

Kartik can you post a link to the pdf?

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7422
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby disha » 21 Dec 2017 02:05

^ Kartik'san and others beat me to it.

Anyway, another link https://swarajyamag.com/insta/japan-to-provide-rs-72-crore-to-develop-traffic-management-system-in-bengaluru

Of the 83, 73 will be an upgraded version – Mark-1A – and the remaining 10 will be a twin seat trainer version. HAL will submit its proposal within 90 days. HAL is already in the process of making 40 Tejas jets as per the final operational clearance (FOC) standards set by the IAF. At the current pace, the Mark 1-A will be ready for its first flight by 2019.

...

There are 123 Tejas jets of two variants that the Defence Ministry is looking to procure. Orders for 40 planes of the base version have already been placed and they are currently under production. Mark 1-A will have 43 upgrades over the base version.


===

Looking forward to LCA Mk2. LCA Mk1A/Mk2 in numbers can replace of Mig 21/23/27 & Jaguar & Mirage 2000 as well. IAF can actually look at only four types: LCAs, Mig 29, Rafale & Su-30 MKI at its core squadrons.

===

On the plateau of Tibet, any foray of planes will be Hi-Hi-Hi. The average height of Tibetan plateau is @15000 ft. So why are we discussing "Lo-Lo-Lo" over Tibet?

LCA Mk1 in its IOC-2 itself has a range of 500 Km* (*depending on mission profile)., and with Mk2, it might just put Chengdu in its ambit.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Indranil » 21 Dec 2017 03:18

It is more than 500 km in IOC-2. I am told that the number is being revised upwards.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Kartik » 21 Dec 2017 04:32

Frankly, IMO, the Tejas Mk2 could easily replace the Jaguar and offer the IAF a far more credible multi-role fighter in its place. One that can perform ground strike from stand-off distances way better than the Jaguar which has been found wanting in profiles that involved higher altitudes, and I mean higher altitudes not just for take off. Even in that area, the Tejas Mk2 would be better than the Jaguar, with a far superior T/W ratio and a wing that'll generate a lot more lift. And since the Mk2 carries more fuel internally with lower drag, its range and endurance should markedly improve.

Now that the IAF has put its faith in the Tejas program with this release of RFP to HAL for the Mk1A, I hope they take it to its logical conclusion, which is the Tejas Mk2. That is the ultimate evolution of this single engine light fighter concept, if one doesn't think of any stealth shaping which would frankly add very little value for a lot of effort, since the Tejas can never really carry ordnance internally.

With the SEF business going in circles, I hope saner heads prevail in the IAF and MoD and just decide to go with the Tejas Mk2.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karan M » 21 Dec 2017 04:41

ramana wrote:Also KaranM , there were news reports the new RM had decided to clear the long standing DAC decisions to support the forces re-equipment.


I think the biggest change this GOI did was to give DRDO its asked for budget, for two years running. That itself is a huge improvement. SANT was stuck on paltry funding and so were many other programs. I brought this up before and even IDSA visitors to DRDO noted it as such. I had mentioned it here
viewtopic.php?p=2211172#p2211172
In September, I thought SANT was likely the RUDRA M-2 which brings up an interesting question about what Rudra M-2 is, the follow on to which program exactly.

So to add to the list of in-development items - foreign equivalent or category in bracket

Garuda/Garuthma for IAF (Glide bombs with INS/sat + terminal lasing)
SAAW for IAF (Hybrid Indian JDAM or Spice)
Pralay (variant of PDV for deep strike by IA, probably active terminal seeker, trajectory shaping)
Brahmos variants for all 3 services (450km being extended to 800 km, to be followed by mini-Brahmos, Brahmos-NG)
Cluster PGM program for fighters/missiles (Smart sensor, top attack, parachute munitions - desi SFW)
PGM HSLD (450kg/250kg HSLD with LGB/sat-nav kits)
QRSAM for IA + Derivative for Navy (30km, track on move SAM)
Akash Mk2 for follow on to Akash (40km+ brand new design)
Akash Mk1S for upgrading Akash (seeker on Akash)
NGARM for IAF (ARM to replace Kh-31s)
CLGM for Arjun (To replace LAHAT)
MPATGM for IA (Javelin equivalent)
Nag/Helina for IA/IAF (ATGM)
Rudra M-2 (what is this?) for IAF/IA
Nirbhay (Long range cruise missile)
SANT (Longer range anti-tank missile)


These have the potential to dramatically improve IAF's warfighting to a level it has hitherto never seen. Huge stocks of domestic PGMs, extensively trialed (as versus fake vendor assurances & so expensive you can't replicate trials in India).

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1551
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ks_sachin » 21 Dec 2017 04:59

Kartik wrote:
Now that the IAF has put its faith in the Tejas program with this release of RFP to HAL for the Mk1A, I hope they take it to its logical conclusion, which is the Tejas Mk2. That is the ultimate evolution of this single engine light fighter concept, if one doesn't think of any stealth shaping which would frankly add very little value for a lot of effort, since the Tejas can never really carry ordnance internally.



Till that damned SEF is ditched IAF has not really put its faith anywhere.

The LCA has taught us to walk. The Mk1A will enable us to jog and the Mk2 will enable us to run. This evolutionary process and the IAF backing that is called faith!!

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4623
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Cain Marko » 21 Dec 2017 05:36

Now that the mk1a order is totally confirmed can naysayers and iaf bashers please go it eat some kawwa biryani.

Great holiday gift this...

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3636
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Kashi » 21 Dec 2017 05:40

IAF has just issued a tender/RFP to HAL for 83 Tejas MK1A, is it the same as a confirmed order?

It sounds like RFP issued for any other procurement, except that no one but HAL manufactures Tejas.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karan M » 21 Dec 2017 05:41

Its not a confirmed order yet. It is the first step in a confirmed order. HAL has to submit a response to this RFP and then have IAF agree to the price. So some ways to go. Having said that, it is still very important because finally IAF is releasing a RFP for this category and initiating the process, which means it is a firm requirement and is being progressed.

The IAF 2nd tranche order for Akash (7 squadrons) is stuck on a point (price negotiations) with BEL and BDL. So hopefully MOD ensures HAL-IAF coordinatio is correct and no hitches.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 21 Dec 2017 06:19

So what are BEL-BD hung up on? Both are DPSU and order is from IAF. Its for second tranche.

Hope its not a bokwas accountant quibble.

In MK1A case, IAF is putting at least a 1/4 and more likely higher part of the new line.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 25 guests