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.
Many IAF planners advocate a balanced air force, with a mix of light and heavy fighters. Light fighters like the Tejas would respond to the tactical battle, while heavier fighters, with their longer range and greater strike power, could tackle more strategic targets.
should we seriously consider investing in mmrca as a necessity now? I would think not. light+heavy combo can do what medium can, till AMCA arrives. $30b saved!!! invest that into kaveri++.
mk-2 should equal the medium a/c envelope pretty much.
"By end-March 2014, SP-1 will fly, and SP-2 will fly a few months later. By the end of next year four Tejas will be in production. In 2015-16, we will build six fighters, and in 2016-17, we will build nine. We are targeting an annual capacity of 12 Tejas fighters," says V Sridharan, the project manager hand-chosen to build the LCA.
"Once the process is stabilised, we can transition to higher rates of production. My initial focus will be on production quality; then we will scale up production. HAL will meet the target of building 20 fighters by 2016-17," he says.
I think it means total of 20 by 2016-17; though, we get 19 if we add production of all the previous years (4+6+9)!
As per this production rate, first 20 get produced at the end of 2016 and the total batch of 40 Mk1's gets produced at the end of 2018 (last quarter if we assume 12 aircrafts in 2017 and 2018). Assuming Mk2 first flight in the last quarter of 2014, this means almost 3 years for Mk2 to get ready before Mk1 production ends. We should expect to see 12 Mk2's per year in 2019 and beyond; making 80 airforce Mk2's will therefore take arround 7 years, i.e., Mk2 air force production goes till 2026 atleast (not accounting for the 40 Naval planes).
IMHO they should aim for something like 20 planes per year so that they produce 12 Mk1 in 2017, 16 Mk1+Mk2 in 2018 and 20 Mk2 in 2019 and beyond. This way IAF can have 120 Mk2s by 2025-2026 at which point, perhaps, the AMCA production should be beginning.
They'll move production up once they stabilize quality.
I found that principle stated above by Mr Sridharan, and reiterated by HAL Chief Tyagi, to be an amazing change from the usual DPSU perspective as seen in OFB which is all about meeting production quotas, quality be darned.
Loss of a Su-30 is pegged at 400cr, the communication sat lost in the last GSLV flight was valued at 450cr, wonder a Rafale will equal both a sat and its launch vehicle in cost
I think we still have not heard on some of the specific features tested - TRN, MAWS, other EWS suite, gps/gagan integration, IRST, etc. I think these will be taken along with other planned tests for FoC.
Its highly rated Elta EL/M-2032 multi-mode radar provides multi-role capability, allowing the pilot to fire air-to-air missiles at enemy aircraft; and also bomb ground targets with a highly accurate navigation-attack system.
Is this a out and out Elta 2032 or a HAL-Elta hybrid as has been reported always on BRF?
as a whole but not parts. i think that is where india-israel is working out in the hybrid area, where the 2052 t/r modules would be BEL made, and reuse israel components. perhaps we might work on the radar processor.
Is Ajai Shukla even close to correct on half the Sukhois being out of service for maintenance, so that is availability of 50%? Is this for peace time alone? I remember when our flankers went to Las Vegas their serviceability was higher than the S.Kos, French and the Unkils at > 90%. That was several thousands of miles from home, they were extra careful there though to ensure high serviceability given the distance from India but still, 50%????
SaiK wrote:as a whole but not parts. i think that is where india-israel is working out in the hybrid area, where the 2052 t/r modules would be BEL made, and reuse israel components. perhaps we might work on the radar processor.
Gurneesh wrote:
Assuming Mk2 first flight in the last quarter of 2014, this means almost 3 years for Mk2 to get ready before Mk1 production ends. We should expect to see 12 Mk2's per year in 2019 and beyond; making 80 airforce Mk2's will therefore take arround 7 years, i.e., Mk2 air force production goes till 2026 atleast (not accounting for the 40 Naval planes).
With news coming out that the Tejas Mk2's Preliminary Design Review is scheduled for Jan 2014, I really don't expect that the prototype build and the first flight will occur in 2014. it may slide into 2015.
It's an Ajai Shukla article - fiction and fact masquerading as analysis, incidentally crowd sourced from soliciting inputs of "experts" on the Internet.
Under normal circumstances would have been laughed off the thread but since he's peddling a worthy cause for a change our friendly cavalry colonel turned John Boyd has new found respectability.
SaiK wrote:as a whole but not parts. i think that is where india-israel is working out in the hybrid area, where the 2052 t/r modules would be BEL made, and reuse israel components. perhaps we might work on the radar processor.
Yogi_G wrote:Is Ajai Shukla even close to correct on half the Sukhois being out of service for maintenance, so that is availability of 50%? Is this for peace time alone? I remember when our flankers went to Las Vegas their serviceability was higher than the S.Kos, French and the Unkils at > 90%. That was several thousands of miles from home, they were extra careful there though to ensure high serviceability given the distance from India but still, 50%????
Something doesn't seem right.
Its just plain wrong. He's making overblown assumptions.
Its highly rated Elta EL/M-2032 multi-mode radar provides multi-role capability, allowing the pilot to fire air-to-air missiles at enemy aircraft; and also bomb ground targets with a highly accurate navigation-attack system.
Is this a out and out Elta 2032 or a HAL-Elta hybrid as has been reported always on BRF?
Thats the question, but I wouldnt count on media being able to discern between the two or even ask this question.
With news coming out that the Tejas Mk2's Preliminary Design Review is scheduled for Jan 2014, I really don't expect that the prototype build and the first flight will occur in 2014. it may slide into 2015.
For MKII, no prototype version.The design is for directly SP version . That is the "learning" from the Tejas per Subrahmanyam. So, I guess the first flight can very well occur in Dec 2014.
SaiK wrote:as a whole but not parts. i think that is where india-israel is working out in the hybrid area, where the 2052 t/r modules would be BEL made, and reuse israel components. perhaps we might work on the radar processor.
saar!! The blue tag says " remove before operation" . its a mechanical key which locks AZ gimbal from rotating and another key in the elevation which holds the gimbal mechanism .so if accidentally somebody switches on pedestal with out removing them the servo amplifier shuts down, which was never tested because it costs a fortune!!!
Here is an excerpt of the relevant section from the link above:
...
Multi-mode radar,a 3D radar is a HAL project of which DRDO's LRDE is a subsystem provider, this project to develop an advanced, lightweight Multimode fire control radar for the LCA Tejas fighter, has faced stiff challenges and been struck by delay. It has now been completed with Elta's (Israel) assistance. The multimode radar is a greater than 100 km range (detection of a small fighter target), 10 target track, two target engage, lightweight system. It has been revealed that an all new combined signal and data processor had been developed, replacing the original separate units. The new unit is much more powerful and makes use of contemporary ADSP processors. The other radar critical hardware has also been developed and validated, however work remains on the software front. The software for the air to air mode has been developed considerably (including search and track while scan in both look up and look down modes) but air to ground modes are being still worked upon. The radar development was shown to be considerably more mature than previously thought. At Aero India 2009, it was revealed that the 3D MMR project has been superseded by the new 3D AESA FCR project led by LRDE. The MMR has been completed with Elta Israel's assistance and now involved Elta EL/M-2032 technology for Air to Ground mapping and targeting. This "hybrid" MMR has been trialled, validated and will be supplied for the initial LCA Tejas fighters of which 2 Squadrons have been ordered.
...
still the confusing wordings gives us questions to ask:
1. Is the hybrid only the antenna panel or
2. includes everything else other than SAR, and A2G modes
3. if 2, then how much of the hybrid work can be carried over to the 3d aesa fcr for mk-2
The hybrid MMR would replace/complement the AS&DP with an Israeli unit running software from the EL-2032.
Rest - antenna, gimbal mechanism, power amplifier (with local TWT), exciter receiver, etc remains same.
The hybrid MMR would replace/complement the AS&DP with an Israeli unit running software from the EL-2032.
Rest - antenna, gimbal mechanism, power amplifier (with local TWT), exciter receiver, etc remains same.
karan sahab ,all that i can say is you are wrong!!!! i dont have authority to say what is right!!!!
RRao, that was the plan, whether it was implemented is another thing.
Lets recap. A year or two back, the Indian antenna and BARC/ECIL gimbal assembly were mentioned as being shipped to Israel for integration and that both were in series production. Further, the MTRDC/BEL mentioned production of the X-Band TWT that makes up the Power Amplifier. At some HAL/ADA display at Aero India, the indigenous subsystems chart on LCA showed Power Amplifier & Exciter/Receiver as part of the display.
Net, these all add up to show the plan may have been implemented.
However, its in Israeli interest to push the complete EL-2032 rather than assist us with this program, plus there are time and cost concerns to envisage as well. Taking somebody else's radar design & trying to integrate a third party radar signal processor and software is nothing but if not complex.
So whether the first LCAs alone have EL-2032 or the SP will have hybrid MMR, or all will have EL-2032.. your thoughts welcome.
^^^ The MTRDC tube was a dud and it had its limitations. but full 6.5KW power was reached with a different TWT and it worked for hundreds of hours with out failure during development. Power amp was almost through and so was exciter receiver. it was the signal and data processor which brought doom and RIP!!!BARC/ECIL cooperation was an excellent piece of work with active inputs from HAL. Yes, the Yehudi want to push their own things for their own business benefits. for the indi radar program we should have bought third party signal and data processor instead of burying the whole project. Designing any Radar whether its ground based or airborne requires a visionary like APJ sahab to head the project . Airborne is much more complicated because of the complex algorithms required for the various modes of operation.
rrao what you say raises serious questions, if we are yet to make the cut in radar signal and data processor then what is going to be done in the case of AESA, AWACS radars ??? Also where does the signal/data processor for the naval radars (SV 2000/2004) are coming from ???
Sagar G wrote:rrao what you say raises serious questions, if we are yet to make the cut in radar signal and data processor then what is going to be done in the case of AESA, AWACS radars ??? Also where does the signal/data processor for the naval radars (SV 2000/2004) are coming from ???
Those are all pure LRDE programs and hence dont face the issues that dogged the multilab development model of the MMR have been bypassed to a large extent.
Also, note the MMR is a FCR - its software needs to be far more robust than that of a surveillance radar based on slower platforms. A supersonic platform with a compact radar able to lock onto other similar platforms is of an order of magnitude different.
I sure hope our emb145 awacs project is making progress toward IOC. phalcon costs $300 mil a pop now and is unaffordable to field in quantity. I see the plane flying regularly in blr and returning to land around 12 noon, but no public reports on progress.
rrao wrote:^^^ The MTRDC tube was a dud and it had its limitations. but full 6.5KW power was reached with a different TWT and it worked for hundreds of hours with out failure during development. Power amp was almost through and so was exciter receiver. it was the signal and data processor which brought doom and RIP!!!BARC/ECIL cooperation was an excellent piece of work with active inputs from HAL. Yes, the Yehudi want to push their own things for their own business benefits. for the indi radar program we should have bought third party signal and data processor instead of burying the whole project. Designing any Radar whether its ground based or airborne requires a visionary like APJ sahab to head the project . Airborne is much more complicated because of the complex algorithms required for the various modes of operation.
Ah, so did we get an Indian TWT for the Power Amplifier? I thought they managed to solve the issues with the original 6.5Kw one?
Eitherways, from what you write, I guess its RIP for the hybrid MMR? I know as of 2009-10, there was still a lot of debate going on in running this program, looks like it was dropped and we went with the EL-2032.
Did we end up using at least the Antenna and BARC gimbal design for the EL-2032 or was even that dropped?
Singha wrote:I sure hope our emb145 awacs project is making progress toward IOC. phalcon costs $300 mil a pop now and is unaffordable to field in quantity. I see the plane flying regularly in blr and returning to land around 12 noon, but no public reports on progress.
Anti-jinx mantra but IOC is scheduled for 2014 per latest projections. And as IAF is deeply involved with program and have agreed to the much more ambitious Project India AWACS, it does seem that things are progressing on track.
We seem to have passed a critical threshold in ground based systems - many in production, so algorithms, software etc can be leveraged. In naval field, revathi variant of 3D CAR is a foothold to leverage and grow into a family of systems. In airborne - now here is where we need some heavy blows. So far using the SV-2000/XV-2004, LRDE has managed to qualify a range of modes, flight hardware and get a working system. But its one meant for slow platforms. The AEW&CS will mark a big breakthrough for us in the surveillance space, but until & unless we have a FCR, we will remain critically dependent on Elta/NIIP/Phazatron/Thales etc.
http://www.defencenow.com/news/406/indi ... orces.html As for some of the crucial projects being carried out indigenously, these include the development of Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar to be fitted on the proposed Light Combat Aircraft-MK II as well as a unique "Through Wall Imaging Radar". Both these radars are being developed by Electronics and Radar Development Establishment (LRDE), a Bangalore-based DRDO lab. The AESA radar is for homegrown LCA-MK II and this radar is expected to be flight-worthy and proven in all aspects in a couple of years
http://www.defencenow.com/news/804/drdo ... -well.html
The AESA radar is also expected to be integrated with the Tejas Mark II LCA besides other programmes. DRDO Chief added that the work is already on and the Tejas Mark-2 will have nothing but the AESA radar. The DRDO lab LRDE is working on the TR (Transmitter & Receiver) modules for the same. Apparently, it is now possible to configure small as well as large AESA radar. The advantage of AESA is that more power can be derived if you increase the numbers of TR modules. DRDO’s AESA radar will be of same size and volume of the present radar integrated on Tejas Mark-1. Once the work starts{complete?} for the Mark-2 of Tejas aircraft, the old radar will be simply replaced by the indigenous AESA radar.
12 sqds. of approx 200+ LCAs would be ideal replacements for the MIGs being phased out.However,even with this number built at a hopefully accelerated ROP,it will take 14-15 years.So only by around 2030 will we have all 200 LCAs,MK-1 and Mk-2s.The early MK-1s will also have to be eventually replaced with MK-2s.The MIG-21s however,barring the Bisons will be phased out by 2020.So for a decade,we will be short of at least 100 aircraft.In addition,the sqd. numbers have fallen in the last decade and also need to be increased to meet the 42 sqd. number that has often been touted. Where are these new aircraft going to come from? All existing types are being upgraded and there will be no extras of these types. Even if the FGFA arrives post 2020,it will be in smaller numbers.The Rafale deal is yet to be inked,cost a major factor,and talk of "saturating" the enemy's radars with LCAs more hype than hope. A figure of 300 LCAs to be manufactured by 2030 would be a better goal to achieve,if we do not want to import more aircraft.This would mean a rate of 20/yr.,not an insurmountable task if the GOI/MOD seriously think of another manufacturing line for the LCA,giving it the highest priority.Perhaps importing trainers instead of the IJT (which is in trouble) and allowing the planned production facilities for the IJT to be utilised for the LCA.The Jaguars are also to be upgraded by Raytheon.Is it possible for the Jaguar line too be used for LCA production,or has it been earmarked for Rafale production? The IAF's BRDs could perhaps be tasked for the Jaguar upgrades.
HAL has a huge amount of food on its plate,the envy of any manufacturer,building the LCA,MMRCA to come,MIKIs,and upgrading M-2000s,Jaguars, and MIG-29s,apart from the AJT,IJT,etc.The Q is whether it will be able to meet the challenge on all fronts given its past patchy record, with the French also expressing their doubts over HAL's capacity to absorb Rafale high-tech.
Singha wrote:I sure hope our emb145 awacs project is making progress toward IOC. phalcon costs $300 mil a pop now and is unaffordable to field in quantity. I see the plane flying regularly in blr and returning to land around 12 noon, but no public reports on progress.
Can we expect LCA to go to TACDE along with the other fighters and the phalcon to rehearse the strategies involving LCA before the FoC or is to be done only after the FoC?
The final operational profile needs to be listed out.. it is better to have check list now than surprises later. I hope IAF has the mission profiles and multiple roles for LCA ops/configurations solidified.
