Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

'Make in India' Single engined fighter

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 00:12

By the way, design houses are extremely important cogs in the wheel. You cannot ask a manufacturer to design something, when they have no experience in that field. You cannot take a 8.5 x 11 sheet of white paper, draw something and go VOILA! It is not that simple.

A great example of this would be Pininfarina - the Italian design house (now owned by the Mahindra group). They designed some of Italy's most prized sports cars. But their designs were translated into reality by one of Italy's most coveted manufacturers - Ferrari. You need both and doing a FACO assembly will not give Tata (or Adani for the Gripen E) the experience or the know how on fighter aircraft design.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 00:15

Rakesh wrote:^^^ Hope? that is your plan? your goal? Your entire vision rests on hope? We all have many hopes....but hopes do not translate into reality.


Stop that. That is MY punchline. Don't you steal it.

All the other stuff, I will research and take into consideration.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 00:19

Chola: Talking about hope....my hope is to fly a twin seater Katrina with me as the pilot and Katrina Kaif as the WSO. Nice hope na? :)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5675
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 29 Jul 2017 00:28

chola wrote:First, Tata will learn how to put together an aircraft.

1. Does Tata need an F-16 to learn that? How about the C-295? Aren't the Do-228NG, PC-12 much lower hanging fruits? How about the AW119 plans, now that AW has been cleared? And finally how about a Tejas line?
chola wrote:And second, Tata will learn how an American production line is sourced.

You either do not know, don't want to know or you must be kidding. You REALLY think screwdrivering 100 aircrafts from CKD/SKD teaches you how to source a production line. Boeing/Lockheed would like to learn from you.
chola wrote:From there I would hope Tata can develop its own network of suppliers which in turn it can call upon once it begin designing and producing its own planes.

Again, my dear friend, you are naive at best. I will give you an example, Mahindra wanted to change the airvan 8 to airvan 10. Simple change of engine, a body plug before and after the wing, to main the CG at the same relative position. They used the same guys who designed the original airvan 8. They finally got the airplane certified, 5 years late. They had stability issues. The plane had been flying with a tufted tail for 2 years.

Design knowledge comes from getting your hands dirty, very dirty. One doesn't get that by putting CKDs and SKDs together. The latter is a good way to make money quickly. Look no further than HAL for the same. HAL's heli division is a completely different story though.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 00:41

Let's see, a thought process in transition,

Running down the world's major fighters and their manufacturers:
F-22: LM
F-35: LM
F-18: Boeing nee MD
SU-30: Sukhoi
MiG-29: MiG
Rafale: Dassault
EuroFighter: Consortium

Tell me ONE of the above where the manufacturer needed to go to a "design house" to get their design.

For aviation, it is like the auto companies at the top of the heap. Ford, GM, Benz and Toyota do not need to go outside for designs. The separation between manufacturing and design is at worst just divisions within the same company.

Sukhoi began as a "design bureau" in 1930s but all modern Sukhois are built at Sukhoi factories NAPA or KnAAPO.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 00:47

Read up on Toyota's lean process principles. Any designer who is divorced from the manufacturing process is next to useless in providing a sensible product that can be mass produced in quality and precision.

Design houses work well in fashion. Far less for vehicles that move on thousands of precise parts.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 00:56

Rakesh, Indira, I appreciate the fact that screwdrivergiri were never supposed to create the ecosystem. Certainly the Russians didn't. PSUs should have cared more.

But with a private firm like TATA? I will bet you my big black arse that they will get into design and develop their own network of suppliers because it is a business. And as a business, it will look for efficiency and investment opportunities.

Seriously, why even bother with all these years of screwdrivergiriing if it doesn't provide us with an ecosystem.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 01:00

chola: Ever heard of Skunk Works? They are LM's own design house. Check it out...

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

- McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) have their own design houses as well.
- The Sukhoi Design Bureau? They are responsible for the design of the Su-27 and her many variations.
- Mikoyan and Gurevich Design Bureau (now known as RSK MiG)....same story.
- Eurofighter GmbH, which consists of Airbus, BAe and Alenia all have their own design houses.
- Dassault Aviation has its own design house.

Tata does NOT have a design house. There is NO part of the MII program that requires LM or Saab to provide a design house for Tata/Adani to adopt. HAL does NOT have a design house. They rely on ADA for that part of the process.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 01:07

Now look at Korean Aerospace. They produced 140 KF-Solahs in the 1990s.

With that experience and the suppliers it built up both domestically and overseas, it went to DESIGN and build the T/F-50.

And now they are selling the thing all over the world: Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Iraq.

All started with screwdrivergiriing the F-Sola.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 01:14

Rakesh wrote:chola: Ever heard of Skunk Works? They are LM's own design house. Check it out...

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

- McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) have their own design houses as well.
- The Sukhoi Design Bureau? They are responsible for the design of the Su-27 and her many variations.
- Mikoyan and Gurevich Design Bureau (now known as RSK MiG)....same story.
- Eurofighter GmbH, which consists of Airbus, BAe and Alenia all have their own design houses.
- Dassault Aviation has its own design house.


That is EXACTLY my point, Rakesh! They are all INHOUSE. Again, read about the Toyota's lean production. Design and manufacturing (and logistics too after manufacture) must be done as closely coupled as possible.

Tata does NOT have a design house. There is NO part of the MII program that requires LM or Saab to provide a design house for Tata/Adani to adopt. HAL does NOT have a design house. They rely on ADA for that part of the process.


Tata has design department across its industrial divisions. Just not in aviation -- yet. Honda didn't have an aviation design team in place when it started the HondaJet either.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 01:22

Rakesh wrote:Chola: Talking about hope....my hope is to fly a twin seater Katrina with me as the pilot and Katrina Kaif as the WSO. Nice hope na? :)


Don't forget about her six sisters as well. Let's use a Saras, you can be my co-pilot. True to form, the Saras will crash land us on a remote island and leave us with Katrina and her sisters who will have nothing to wear except palm leaves and coconut husks.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 01:39

chola wrote:That is EXACTLY my point, Rakesh! They are all INHOUSE. Again, read about the Toyota's lean production. Design and manufacturing (and logistics too after manufacture) must be done as closely coupled as possible.

What is wrong with you? Are you dense or are you just trolling for the sake of? :D

I repeat ---> There is NO part of the MII program that requires LM or Saab to provide a design house for Tata/Adani to adopt.

How is Tata/Adani going to design planes without that? Dude, are you off your meds again?

chola wrote:Tata has design department across its industrial divisions. Just not in aviation -- yet. Honda didn't have an aviation design team in place when it started the HondaJet either.

The HondaJet comes from the Honda Aircraft Company (a division of Honda) which has its HQ not in Japan, but in the United States. Why did they not do it in Japan instead? Did you ever think about that?

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 01:45

chola wrote:Now look at Korean Aerospace. They produced 140 KF-Solahs in the 1990s.

With that experience and the suppliers it built up both domestically and overseas, it went to DESIGN and build the T/F-50.

And now they are selling the thing all over the world: Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Iraq.

All started with screwdrivergiriing the F-Sola.

You could not be MORE wrong.

The K-50 was designed as part of a joint collaboration between Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) and Lockheed Martin (LM). Basically LM did ALL the heavy lifting.

Guess what powers the T-50? An American GE F404 engine.
Guess what radar the T-50 has? An American AN/APG-67 radar. The TA-50 and FA-50 have an Israeli EL/M-2032 radar.
Guess what weapons the T-50 fires? All American/European weapons.

What exactly of VALUE is "South Korean" in the platform?

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 01:48

Rakesh wrote:
chola wrote:That is EXACTLY my point, Rakesh! They are all INHOUSE. Again, read about the Toyota's lean production. Design and manufacturing (and logistics too after manufacture) must be done as closely coupled as possible.

What is wrong with you? Are you dense or are you just trolling for the sake of? :D

I repeat ---> There is NO part of the MII program that requires LM or Saab to provide a design house for Tata/Adani to adopt.

How is Tata/Adani going to design planes without that? Dude, are you off your meds again?

chola wrote:Tata has design department across its industrial divisions. Just not in aviation -- yet. Honda didn't have an aviation design team in place when it started the HondaJet either.

The HondaJet comes from the Honda Aircraft Company (a division of Honda) which has its HQ not in Japan, but in the United States. Why did they not do it in Japan instead? Did you ever think about that?


Dude, it's a first step! I said Tata will eventually get into design not immediately.

I don't just give the private sector their chance. The design teams will evolve organically in house.

If we don't have an ecosystem after 5 decades of HAL and ADA then it is time for a change. Seriously, except for Sukhoi and MiG, those on my list are all private firms in origin.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 01:54

Rakesh wrote:
chola wrote:Now look at Korean Aerospace. They produced 140 KF-Solahs in the 1990s.

With that experience and the suppliers it built up both domestically and overseas, it went to DESIGN and build the T/F-50.

And now they are selling the thing all over the world: Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Iraq.

All started with screwdrivergiriing the F-Sola.

You could not be MORE wrong.

The K-50 was designed as part of a joint collaboration between Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) and Lockheed Martin (LM). Basically LM did ALL the heavy lifting.

Guess what powers the T-50? An American GE F404 engine.
Guess what radar the T-50 has? An American AN/APG-67 radar. The TA-50 and FA-50 have an Israeli EL/M-2032 radar.
Guess what weapons the T-50 fires? All American/European weapons.

What exactly of VALUE is "South Korean" in the platform?


Please, people say exactly the same stuff about the LCA.

But guess what, I would be happy as a Paki in shit, if the LCA is sold around the world with the F404 and the Elta.

There is no way you can win this argument.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 02:02

BTW, I'm "trolling" when the GOI is putting out this single engine tender and F-16 is repeatedly mentioned as a heavy favorite? When the GOI instead of just setting up a HAL/Firangi hookup once more is explicitly calling for partnerships with India's private sector?

Sorry, Modi's team know exactly what it is doing.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 02:48

chola wrote:Dude, it's a first step! I said Tata will eventually get into design not immediately.

I don't just give the private sector their chance. The design teams will evolve organically in house.

If we don't have an ecosystem after 5 decades of HAL and ADA then it is time for a change. Seriously, except for Sukhoi and MiG, those on my list are all private firms in origin.

I am going to ignore that you made that asinine statement --> "The design teams will evolve organically in house" :lol:

Assume the above happens :roll: and Tata now has a design bureau that can design fighters. So let's examine your scenario via a timeline. An agreement is signed in 2019 (at best). Factory is built and is ready by 2020 (at best). Training of production personnel is complete by 2020 (at best) as well. And for 100 fighters, let's say Tata completes them by 2025, at the rate of 20 aircraft per year.

By 2025, Tata will magically have a design bureau. Wow, who would have thought! Chola, you are so wise.

Now it takes a good chunk of time to design & develop a fighter and have it enter service. Let's take the F-35 example from Lockheed Martin. Conceptual design/studies started in 1993. The first production F-35 entered USMC in mid 2015. So a good 22 years.

Going by that yardstick, if Tata's MFDB (Magical & Fantasy Design Bureau) - with no prior real world experience in designing fighters - begins studies on a fighter in 2025...the first production variant should enter service in 2045. Right?

But wait, what did Tata build from 2020 - 2025? A fourth generation F-16. So I am sure with that design knowledge, Tata will produce a fourth generation fighter in 2045. Who wants that? Even Fiji will not want it. Unless you believe that along with the Organic MFDB, Tata will develop a magic wand as well. With you, anything is possible.

And with the Tata's magic wand, they will skip an entire generation and go straight from fourth generation to sixth generation, complete with lasers and photon torpedoes. And of course, warp speed and beaming technology...no ejection seat.

chola wrote:Please, people say exactly the same stuff about the LCA.

But guess what, I would be happy as a Paki in shit, if the LCA is sold around the world with the F404 and the Elta.

There is no way you can win this argument.

Yes folks say the same about the Tejas as well. But that does not take away from your statement that the Koreans designed the T-50 and it started from screwdrivergiri of the F-Solah. I have disproved that beyond doubt. You may not want to believe it, but that is a moot point.

chola wrote:BTW, I'm "trolling" when the GOI is putting out this single engine tender and F-16 is repeatedly mentioned as a heavy favorite? When the GOI instead of just setting up a HAL/Firangi hookup once more is explicitly calling for partnerships with India's private sector?

Sorry, Modi's team know exactly what it is doing.

The GoI loves the F-16, the IAF loves the Gripen E. And if the IAF has any say in this process, vaporware will win. The IAF wants nothing to do with the F-Solah. The only way that platform is coming, is if the GOI forces the IAF to do so. And going by how the GOI has pushed the final decision to 2019, shows how much ownership they have over the MII program.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 02:53

Re-posting my own post from page 99 of this thread.

India won't ink a single-engine fighter deal before 2019
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/ana ... efore-2019

Some analysts even say the F-16 will never be bought by the Indian Air Force, or IAF. "There isn't now even the slightest IAF interest in the F-16 Block 70 or any other variant," said Bharat Karnad, professor of national security studies at Centre for Policy Research. When asked about the outcome of the flight trials the IAF will conduct, Karnad said, "Nothing, it will take time and delay any decision to beyond the 2019 election. Thereafter, the medium multirole combat aircraft, or MMRCA, metrics will still apply, and the F-16 will be rejected."

Lends credence to the theory that the IAF does not like the F-16. Only the GoI does. The ball is not in LM's court, but in the GoI's court. And from the above article, the GoI has pushed the final decision to beyond 2019 and to the IAF. And guess which the IAF will choose?

"In my opinion, in the current scenario with home-grown light combat aircraft, or LCA, getting produced and with LCA Mark-1A and an order of 83 cleared by the government already, I do not foresee an immediate decision on any other single-engine fighter aircraft soon," the IAF official added.

- So much for squadron shortage.
- So much for a couple of F-Solah / Gripen squadrons joining the IAF right away.
- And what a downer that Tata-LM agreement in June 2017 was.
- Saab played this game better than LM. They did not jump to sign an agreement with the Adani Group after the Tata-LM annoncement.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_Sharma » 29 Jul 2017 04:28

Rakesh Saar please keep using his posts to break the myth of how buying 100 f16s will make an aero indigenous power, I am surprised how much American-platform supporters can get away with, while smallest post supporting Russian product invites name calling eg. Rodina lovers etc.

For lurkers this thread demolished such myth some time ago:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6387

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5675
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 29 Jul 2017 11:41

I think it is an exercise in vain to ask posters to post short pertinent points. But here's another futile attempt.

Chola sir, in many words you said the following. It makes business sense for a private sector company to start designing its only aircraft, and assembling 100-odd F-16s is the first step. Can you tell me why does it make business sense now? Afterall, the Tata's have been here for more than a century. What has changed? Is there a fighter design competition announced, winner of which will get IAF's next generation aircraft orders?

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7466
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Pratyush » 29 Jul 2017 12:43

The only way some one can design an aircraft is to design it. You cannot do screwdriver assembly and learn the finer points of air craft design. So India will learn the same amount that india learnt from the whole lot of jaguar and mig and sukhoi.

To me LCA is the single most important piece of the jigsaw that the Indian MIC is missing. India needs to learn how to mass produce fighters. No f16 or jas 39 or sukhoi or mig will ever teach it that.

Only the mass manufacturing of LCA will.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 29 Jul 2017 15:25

Indranil wrote:I think it is an exercise in vain to ask posters to post short pertinent points. But here's another futile attempt.

Chola sir, in many words you said the following. It makes business sense for a private sector company to start designing its only aircraft, and assembling 100-odd F-16s is the first step. Can you tell me why does it make business sense now? Afterall, the Tata's have been here for more than a century. What has changed? Is there a fighter design competition announced, winner of which will get IAF's next generation aircraft orders?


Tata had never been in the position to get into aviation until the F-16 hookup with GD.

Now why would the GoI propose such a thing? Even if it were a ploy to strengthen alliance with Unkil then why not go the traditional route have HAL partner with GD?

The fact is the PSU model has not delivered what the country is capable of and Modi's team wants to change that. The most dynamic part of our economy is the private sector why not take advantage of it?

It cannot happen overnight. You need to start somewhere. Once they are assured that they can compete for military contracts, we will see Tata, Reliance and their brethren expand into every niche and that includes design because that is what businesses do.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 29 Jul 2017 20:33

chola wrote:Tata had never been in the position to get into aviation until the F-16 hookup with GD.

Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL) has been making parts for the C-130 and S-92 helicopter for a while now. Can Tata make a C-130 type aircraft or a S-92 class helictoper? If not now, when do you forsee Tata making this? The only thing Tata has learnt is how to make the components. Designing them and everything that goes with it, is still being done in the United States...as it should be. Boeing and Lockheed Martin are FOR-PROFIT organizations. They have a responsibility to their shareholders and they will NOT do something that would be detrimental to that effort. Not Lockheed Martin, not Boeing, not Dassault, not RSK-MiG, not Sukhoi or any other company on earth will do what you are suggesting.

Why has LM's Skunk Works not opened shop in India to partner with Tata, HAL or anyone else? Why has India not asked for this? :) The policy makers in India aready know the answer to this. But why don't you tell us?

If you were the head of an aviation company, like the CEO of Lockheed Martin, would you allow that? Think about that. Now one strategy an aviation company will do (or any other company for that matter) - to keep your organization profitable and competitive - is allow license production of aircraft in foreign countries. You keep the intellectual property with you - as it should be - and allow the host country to churn out your product. There is nothing evil about this - it is just plain business. And Sukhoi and MiG did the same thing all these decades in India and Lockheed Martin (and Boeing) will do the same. Dassault went a step further and basically insulted HAL when they said they cannot provide "quality guarantees" for the Rafales to be manufactured in India. And they are absolutely right.

If India wants to be competitive - it has to pour the resources and spend years (if not decades) in developing her aerospace eco system. No other country will do that. For that you need a clear goal, a vision of what India needs to master. That is not there in India now. And thus other organizations are ready to fill that void, but in their interests and on their terms. And the bureaucracy and politicians in India who do not know the difference are eager to partner on this. License production is a band-aid solution. But right now, it appears that we may need that band-aid solution. However, to palm it off as a solution to India's aerospace woes is complete and utter nonsense. This deal will not change anything in India.

This is not about winning an argument, as you said earlier. I (or no one else) cannot make you believe anything. However, you have been drinking the cool-aid from one or two members on BRF and regurgitating that nonsense. Your positions are devoid of substance because the ones you have been blindling following on BRF on this issue, have no definitive answers when pointed & logical questions are asked. Their reply to that is that BRF cannot see the value of the F-Solah deal. And they are right, because BRF knows a sh!t deal when it sees one and will call it out as such.

chola wrote:Now why would the GoI propose such a thing? Even if it were a ploy to strengthen alliance with Unkil then why not go the traditional route have HAL partner with GD?

GD/LM wants nothing to do with HAL. That is why they signed a deal with Tata. Dassault wanted nothing to do with HAL either. That is why they signed a JV with Reliance for the Rafale deal. Saab wants nothing to do with HAL as well. That is why if they win the SE deal, it will likely be the Adani group. HAL is like the plague for foreign aviation companies and it makes sense to stay away from HAL.

chola wrote:The fact is the PSU model has not delivered what the country is capable of and Modi's team wants to change that. The most dynamic part of our economy is the private sector why not take advantage of it?

Stop palming this idea on Modi or his team. When this deal goes south (and it will) it will be very easy to blame the Prime Minister for it. His ownership lies in the idea, but the actual details (the offer) are with LM and Saab. This deal will create assembly jobs, but that is it. Nothing else will come out of this.

chola wrote:It cannot happen overnight. You need to start somewhere. Once they are assured that they can compete for military contracts, we will see Tata, Reliance and their brethren expand into every niche and that includes design because that is what businesses do.

So list the steps that Tata, Reliance or whoever else will take to expand from production to a vibrant aviation eco-system? Please explain.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5675
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 29 Jul 2017 21:27

chola wrote:
Indranil wrote:I think it is an exercise in vain to ask posters to post short pertinent points. But here's another futile attempt.

Chola sir, in many words you said the following. It makes business sense for a private sector company to start designing its only aircraft, and assembling 100-odd F-16s is the first step. Can you tell me why does it make business sense now? Afterall, the Tata's have been here for more than a century. What has changed? Is there a fighter design competition announced, winner of which will get IAF's next generation aircraft orders?


Tata had never been in the position to get into aviation until the F-16 hookup with GD.

Now why would the GoI propose such a thing? Even if it were a ploy to strengthen alliance with Unkil then why not go the traditional route have HAL partner with GD?

The fact is the PSU model has not delivered what the country is capable of and Modi's team wants to change that. The most dynamic part of our economy is the private sector why not take advantage of it?

It cannot happen overnight. You need to start somewhere. Once they are assured that they can compete for military contracts, we will see Tata, Reliance and their brethren expand into every niche and that includes design because that is what businesses do.

I asked a simple question, sir. Where is the answer to what I asked in your reply? LM/Boeing etc. don't design a plane because they can. They design a plane for a competition, winner of which is assured a large order.

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12894
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby negi » 30 Jul 2017 12:21

Chola has a valid point about private sector using manufacturing as a stepping stone to moving into owning complete life-cycle of producing a military jet however he is imo mistaken to think that LM/GD will facilitate that sort of a journey for Tata or anyone else . If Tata had say entered into a JV with say ADA or HAL for mass production of Tejas then I would concur with his line of argument . Let us say if Tata is assured of an order for say 250 Tejas AC then being a private company they will leave no stone unturned to meet their targets may be this will mean poaching folks from HAL and DRDO's sister labs in relevant disciplines but this would be beneficial to India in every aspect people with fire in the belly and hunger for growth will get an employer with faster career growth paths and lesser bureaucracy those aspiring for a slow and steady job at a PSU will get more vacancies to apply for and overall HAL's produce will now have a competitor so timelines , QC and other aspects of AC maintenance will see active interest from both parties .

There is a catch here, if Tejas is a really as good as we all believe then it should be priced pretty close to the competition otherwise why would even a Indic company like Tata offer to manufacture it ? Their interest in F-16 assembly is primarily because IAF is willing to pay GD a meaty sum per air-frame so there are enough margins built into the deal for GD to share some of the spoils with Tatas and still end up making decent profit ; moreover in the long term get a customer that will be a source of revenue in shape of maintenance , spares and new accessories for at least 2-3 decades in no other business you can get assured returns for such a long span of time after closing the deal .

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Marten » 30 Jul 2017 12:58

Superb point, Negi. Let me take the example/article shared by an influential Guru today (and I paraphrase for convenience):
The head of Reliance Retail says MNCs cannot compete with Baba Ramdev because he is not working for th 15% margin, but is working for a legacy.

The key lies here. Not one private partner will work for less than 40% gross margins. Because they are in business to make money, not contribute to national strengths and capabilities. However, when one compounds the GPMs for each layer/tier in the chain, one will see how the cost has suddenly doubled. In reality, there must be a difference of $15-20mn in real costs (due to both efficiencies of scale and technology), and the rest are all margins.

If we understand that we are merely giving away half the cost of a SE to a bunch of middlemen, no matter how sophisticated the chain, and then realize that the most efficient way of spending those meager sums is that we might as well have these folks set up component manufacturing in India through a tax holiday and committed business model! Why then are the powers in question not ensuring this SP is given higher priority? Why then is DPP not offering more of these sops to foreign players who have skills and technologies that we so desperately need. (Moreover since we are prioritizing these over our current capabilities and are willing to lose the only jet that is actually being manufactured with some semblance of Indian control).

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 30 Jul 2017 13:43

I posted this weeks ago on the LCA thread and it sums up my point.

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.


If 16 years after first flight and you can't productionize an INDIGENOUS machine with these PSUs then it is time for a change.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 30 Jul 2017 14:17

Rakesh, I find the following problematic and it may be this exact attitude that has created the current situation (lack of ecosystem.)

By the way, design houses are extremely important cogs in the wheel. You cannot ask a manufacturer to design something, when they have no experience in that field.


The above is complete bullshit when comes to the aviation firms. Look at the list I produced. Every one of them from LM to Dassault to Sukhoi design and build their own planes.

And read my post on Toyota and its bible for precision manufacturing: a designer who is decoupled from the company's manufacturing process is practically useless. It is better in house for any company in manufacturing and for fighter aircraft it is always in house.

The fact that we use an old soviet style system that separates design ADA from manufacturer HAL make us an outlier to all the other aircraft manufacturers out there who are integrated.

Why should a national project like the LCA which first flew in 2001 need another 16 years just to get four into service?

Why was KAI whose T-50 flew one year after LCA able to induct it in 2005? Worse still, why was the lizard's CAC during the same period able to mass produce the J-10, then the FC-1 (JF-17) and then the J-20, one after the other?

Could it be because KAI and CAC like LM, Boeing, Dassault, etc. are integrated companies with design teams knowing full well what the capacity of the company is and can layer one project after the next?

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby chola » 30 Jul 2017 14:21

Cross posting from the LCA thread again, this summarizes my thoughts on how the private sector can help the country -- not HAL or ADA:

chola wrote:Exactly! Global competition have made the brothers Ambani masters who have transcended the culture. Not just the bada bai but look at all the NRI CEOs in the West's most iconic and competitive firms.

In fact, you WANT them to poach orders from HAL -- on merit, not just because of GOI directives.

You give them a chance to compete against HAL and even if they don't dominate, it will give you a far more efficient system nationally because HAL will be forced to get off its arse to survive.

The truth is HAL should have a massive lead over any private sector player from experience alone. So you want the bada bai and their private sector colleagues to not only poach orders but also TALENT from HAL so they could be put to better use. I think there are multitudes of talented competitent people trapped under the thumbs of fossilized or simply corrupt babus who can do great things once a new opportunity is given to them. That is where competition and the private sector is so inportant.

You want a churning, aggressive sector that can innovate and produce on a dime.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 30 Jul 2017 17:26

Finally negi answers the very question that I have been asking for a while - where are you going to find the people to assemble this aircraft? And negi's reply was "...may be this will mean poaching folks from HAL and DRDO's sister labs in relevant disciplines..."
So, thank you negi.

Chola, just a little fun fact for you --- these US inhouse design bureaus that you so love to talk about, get their funding from the American Govt. Basically Uncle Sam bank rolls the development of their fighters. The YF-16, YF-17, JSF, YF-22 and YF-23 were largely developed with American taxpayer money. You think Tata is going to dole out its own billions in developing its own fighter (ADA is a division of the MoD for that very reason) only to turn around and have goal posts shifted continously?

Cross Post from the Indian Navy thread on the need for having prior design experience versus cooking cutting...
tsarkar wrote:For some reason not apparent to me, DND does not provide design consultancy to private shipyards. The private shipyards have to scrounge around with design bureaus around the world. They lack skills & experience to validate or test the designs - that results in cost overruns that unlike PSU's they're unable to pass to GoI/MoD. Pipavav used Russian designs for the OPV that had flaws that bankrupted the company trying to rectify. Their civil 3 offshore support vessels and five 75,000 tonne bulk carriers designed by commercial western bureaus were built well in time. Same for Alcock Ashdown that used an Australian design for survey catamarans.

Chola, I will rebuttal your claims once again, point by point, but before I go there I ask you AGAIN --> Elaborate/Explain your own statement.

chola wrote:It cannot happen overnight. You need to start somewhere. Once they are assured that they can compete for military contracts, we will see Tata, Reliance and their brethren expand into every niche and that includes design because that is what businesses do.

So list the steps that Tata, Reliance or whoever else will take to expand from production to a vibrant aviation eco-system? Explain. Also before you post, remember to let us know about engine development, radar development, air frame design and weaponry development. They all have to be successful and working, okay? Boeing and Lockheed Martin (and their partner organizations in the US all do this VERY well). So explain.

The entire premise of your argument rests on HOPE. This is not marriage and to be honest, even in marriage that does not work holistically. But that is a different topic. You HOPE that Tata will develop its own design capability after producing 100 F-Solahs. You can talk about Toyota, Honda, Joseph, Paul and Mary but you have yet to provide a clear path from how after assembling a fourth generation fighter is Tata going to design & develop another. So Explain.

A point for you to think about. Cross posting from the Tejas thread.
Dileep wrote:In other news, apparently everything new that I know of are frozen at ADA. Optimistically, it is to get everything finished for the current spec. Pessimistically, it is to pave way for the SE.

By the way, why are your one or two "gurus" on BRF - from whom you are getting this wonderful utopian theory from - so silent? Cat got their tongue? :) One lives in flights of fancies and the other is his mini-me. Rest assured, they are reading this and just hoping F-Solah wins so the opposition goes silent.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3299
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cosmo_R » 30 Jul 2017 19:56

@Negi
^^^"Let us say if Tata is assured of an order for say 250 Tejas AC then being a private company they will leave no stone unturned to meet their targets may be this will mean poaching folks from HAL and DRDO's sister labs in relevant disciplines but this would be beneficial to India in every aspect people with fire in the belly and hunger for growth will get an employer with faster career growth paths and lesser bureaucracy those aspiring for a slow and steady job at a PSU will get more vacancies to apply for and overall HAL's produce will now have a competitor so timelines


Exactly. The PSUs have to figure out how to retain their top performers or lose them to Tata. It's good for the employees and it's good for India because Tatas will have a better chance of delivering on time/budget. It's also going to going to light a fire under folks who see a new high paying job that does not involve IT. It's bad for the PSUs but it's not bad for India and it's very good for individuals who otherwise will languish in badly managed enterprises. Let the war for talent begin.

Some folks here are using the SEF as extinction time for the LCA if not by siphoning off funds, then by siphoning off human resources. With 120 orders, HAL has enough on its hands and it will take them 6-12 years to fill that order and if they get it right, more orders will follow (attrition, fleet retirements).

Finally, there is the separate issue which gets wrongly interleaved: "is the F-16 being dumped on India?" That is a strategic decision—not because as some have suggested "to please the Amreekis" but because the alternative is the F35. On a pure economics basis, my guess is that when you add up the cost of the learning curve of the Indian line and the fact that (as LM hinted somewhere) the first fully MII F-16 will take around 7 years to roll out, its cost will be similar to what the Dassault folks projected (30% more than French built) and what HAL built MKIs cost vs Irkutsk-built (30% more). That's my guess.

So where's the strategic part? With the F-16, it's about GoI trying to channel monies it must spend, to create manufacturing jobs (including ecosystem) that it must create if India is to transition from an rural/agricultural society to a manufacturing/urban one. The F16 line by itself is not going to dent manufacturing employment but it may tip the consensus to do it differently. FWIWW, the defense chiefs recently met with Arun Jaitley and gave him a ~$200 bn five year capital budget. Even if we assume 20% of it actually gets disbursed, that's a lot of money to fuel factory jobs (before the cascading effect). That's the strategic economics.

I think the F35 is not offered on the same terms (if the question is "aha! and why not?" it takes a little googling and analysis) but I would guess that with some 2,400 units + being produced, it's going to be very competitive with the F16 flyaway cost. As brar_w has pointed out. however, the F35 even on the FACO basis comes as a black box—we will get 'locked-in' to the platform and to the US strategy. But on a value for money and survivability basis, you cant beat it. OTOH, one can also argue, we're also locked into the MKI and Russian whims.

I don't have a horse in this race. If tomorrow, Mahindra (for example) is able to put forward a plan that says "here's the money we will spend, give us the LCA 'ToT'/Deep license, and the order for 200 LCAs, we will commit to MK2, 3 and 4, I'd drop the F16 idea and the SEF one and have a 'Manhattan Project' for the AMCA.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5675
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 30 Jul 2017 22:53

^^^ Does creation of manufacturing jobs be done only through an imported assembly line. For example, if Tata assembles LCAs, not will there be assembly jobs, but jobs for manufacturing a much higher number of sub-components.

Humble request continues: Could you guys post your points only, instead of writing essays.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2711
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 30 Jul 2017 23:03

I think a private entity to become a fighter manufacturer would need some handholding and ADA can't do that.

Hence the need for something like Saab or LM.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2711
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 30 Jul 2017 23:05

Cosmo_R wrote:I don't have a horse in this race. If tomorrow, Mahindra (for example) is able to put forward a plan that says "here's the money we will spend, give us the LCA 'ToT'/Deep license, and the order for 200 LCAs, we will commit to MK2, 3 and 4, I'd drop the F16 idea and the SEF one and have a 'Manhattan Project' for the AMCA.


So why not the gripen instead of the solah?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5675
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Indranil » 30 Jul 2017 23:09

Cain Marko wrote:I think a private entity to become a fighter manufacturer would need some handholding and ADA can't do that.

Hence the need for something like Saab or LM.

And why would another private fighter manufacturer namely SAAB or LM willfully help bring up a competitor? People have pointed to KAI. KAI has developed so much design knowledge over the past four decades that it can't design any aircraft (except basic trainers) without LM's handholding. Just saying. On the other hand, there is Embraer, Avic, Mitsubishi, Kawasaki. Or for that matter, SAAB itself. They are design houses not by virtue of license manufacturing.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Manish_Sharma » 31 Jul 2017 06:50

Dileep wrote:
In other news, apparently everything new that I know of are frozen at ADA. Optimistically, it is to get everything finished for the current spec. Pessimistically, it is to pave way for the SE.


:cry:

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3715
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2017 07:37

Nothing to be sad about. This was bound to happen. What is sad is we will repeat this mistake again, as we have done in the past.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2711
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 31 Jul 2017 13:18

Indranil wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:I think a private entity to become a fighter manufacturer would need some handholding and ADA can't do that.

Hence the need for something like Saab or LM.

And why would another private fighter manufacturer namely SAAB or LM willfully help bring up a competitor? People have pointed to KAI. KAI has developed so much design knowledge over the past four decades that it can't design any aircraft (except basic trainers) without LM's handholding. Just saying. On the other hand, there is Embraer, Avic, Mitsubishi, Kawasaki. Or for that matter, SAAB itself. They are design houses not by virtue of license manufacturing.


Because.....
For Saab, that's a lot of money for a company which is not doing great.

For LM, making a small minnow in manufacturing hardly amounts to greater competition for a company that is a giant in this field. It also gives them some easy monies by finding use for it's older tech.

Nobody in their right mind should expect a local aero design bureau from this program. At best you will get another expert at screw drivergiri, which is great because it creates competition to the PSU called HAL.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2379
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby JayS » 31 Jul 2017 15:16

Cain Marko wrote:
Nobody in their right mind should expect a local aero design bureau from this program. At best you will get another expert at screw drivergiri, which is great because it creates competition to the PSU called HAL.


So from "quick re-capitalisation of IAF numbers" and "creating world class aircraft manufacturers" now we come down to "making glorified "pvt ltd" screwdriver-drivers" and "creating competition to the PSU called HAL". Way to go. :lol: :lol:

I wonder what will be the levels of expectations by the time this thread reaches 200 pages. :lol: :lol:

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2711
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Postby Cain Marko » 31 Jul 2017 15:33

I didn't realize you held Hal in such low esteem but I don't see why a healthy dose of competition is such a bad idea. Btw, personally I never claimed much of the above mentioned hyprrbole...


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Chinmay, JayS, sgopal and 41 guests