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

LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

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.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 59338
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 17 Feb 2017 21:19

Makes sense. Clay multani mitti types absorb oil from.such glassy surfaces

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 703
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby kvraghav » 17 Feb 2017 21:42

There are two trainer prototypes?

dkhare
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 03:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby dkhare » 17 Feb 2017 22:15

jamwal wrote:The quality of refueling probe on Tejas is excellent. Compare it to Jaguar's

Image


What version of the Jaguar is that above? Is that a mock-up?

IAF Jaguars have a retractable IFR probe. When we first acquired the Jaguars, the probes were removed to save weight. They were reinstalled when we acquired airborne tankers.

Here is a picture from BR's gallery:
Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5407
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 17 Feb 2017 22:37

That fixed IFR is only on Jaguar trainers.

Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1923
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Marten » 17 Feb 2017 23:55

kvraghav wrote:There are two trainer prototypes?

Sir, these are the two trainers (PV 5 and PV 6) being used for Customer flights. (there are multiple articles on previous pages but I think Ananthakrishnan revealed this first).

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3361
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kartik » 18 Feb 2017 00:19

That 'Clay bar" has something to do with the IFF antennas, AFAIR.

Image These white antennas are mounted just aft of the radome.

IFF is mounted on the radar in the case of the Tejas.

In this image, it is visible as a tiny blue antenna, immediately aft of the radome.

Image

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2630
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby arshyam » 18 Feb 2017 09:22

Image

If this is a mockup, it's a damn good one. But it wasn't, according to the ADA guys there. Granted, they were from avionics, but this is what happened when I went up to the cockpit:

They were allowing people to sit inside and take pics as the crowd was thin in the morning. They did ask such people to remove their shoes before climbing in (why do that for a mock up?). Then, some higher up came and instructed them to show the layout properly to a person behind me in the queue. Turned out the gent was from LRDE and wanted to "see how it looks since he had worked on it". I asked him if he worked on the radar/radome, and he only said "something like that". Didn't press further, obviously.

Anyway, by the time I came up to the cockpit, the ADA guys had closed the canopy since people were taking time going in and out, and apologized to me about not allowing me inside. They also said "the other problem is people might push some button here or there without knowing, and being a live aircraft, we don't want to risk it". Take it FWIW, but that's what he said. I told him not to bother since sitting inside wasn't exactly my goal, but wanting to take a peek inside it. So he opened the canopy and showed me (and a few other people in the line) where the various switches and controls are (nothing new for the gurus on the forum, std stuff for the most part). Rudder control pedals, the main control stick, main power switch, battery main (they mentioned the HMDS was the highest voltage rating in the entire cockpit, at 18V IIRC), HUD, seat ejection handle, etc.

Unfortunately, in my excitement, I forgot to take photos of the open cockpit, and had taken a couple earlier with the canopy closed. Glare meant that not much of interest visible in those pics, that's why I didn't upload them.

arvin
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 66
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby arvin » 18 Feb 2017 12:28

>>>If this is a mockup, it's a damn good one. But it wasn't, according to the ADA guys there.

It was not a mockup. The tail had KH-2011 written on it. The article seems to be a paid article by someone. On the contrary, nearby Gripen looked like a mock up with no numbering on tail, very smooth finishes which didnt look like metal.
I hope F-16 gets selected for the single engine make in india program.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2630
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby arshyam » 18 Feb 2017 12:45

True, I had mentioned the tail number earlier as well, but then this article came about...

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2630
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby arshyam » 18 Feb 2017 12:47

I found this image to be representative of
a) how complex a fighter aircraft is in terms of sub-systems, and
b) how much we benefit by designing and building one in-house.

Who would have thought just the breathing mechanism for a pilot had so many sub-components, each important by itself?

Image

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35289
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby SaiK » 18 Feb 2017 17:44

Your take? I'd not dis the article though. The truth as always is in the middle

https://bharatkarnad.com/2017/02/17/the ... -of-tejas/

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 18 Feb 2017 19:52

SaiK wrote:Your take? I'd not dis the article though. The truth as always is in the middle

https://bharatkarnad.com/2017/02/17/the ... -of-tejas/


+1

India ends up financing the aerospace R&D base of foreign countries while destroying its own.

The single engine foreign fighter RFI being hurriedly pushed through which largely duplicates the role of the LCA is a worrying example of how indigenous efforts are sabotaged & destroyed.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 18 Feb 2017 20:16

arshyam wrote:True, I had mentioned the tail number earlier as well, but then this article came about...


Some junk article. He must be blind to have missed it and think it was a mock up. It was very real aircraft. It most probably didn't have all the innards in place. LSP-1 is very old one and its configuration is very primitive as compared to current configuration. One can see the difference LSP series has from LSP-1 to LSP-8 from the CAG report. LSP-1 was probably much less useful due to its primitive config and was used only for 74 flights. ADA might have cannibalised some parts from from LSP-1, which is not very big stretch of imagination. So basically in all probability LSP-1 is non-functional for quite some time. But it is very much real airframe that they had put it there. Yes they did paint the nozzle in rather funny way. But anyway it really doesn't matter for people whether it was fully functional aircraft or not.

Gripen-E was a mock-up with plastic airframe.

Unlucky for me, it was rather crowdy even at 9:15AM on Friday and they were only allowing people to seat on the edge of canopy and take a snap. I asked for permission but they didn't allow me to take a snap of Cockpit, which is OK.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 18 Feb 2017 20:20

tsarkar wrote:Shouldn't the untruth's - from all sides - also stop? And let the truth prevail? Yet we've posters repeatedly lying about ACM Raha & ACM Browne on what they didn't say nor did.


Who's lying? See below :

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

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/lca-tejas-mk-2 ... ief-667693


This was the guy who was running the IAF..... :roll:

With the foreign single engine plane RFI being hurriedly pushed through by lobbyists and dudes like above running around, it will be a miracle if the LCA does not end up like the Arjun tank.

What reason is there to buy hundreds of single engine planes that largely duplicate the role of the LCA at enormous costs. This especially so as the LCA is beginning to meet its objectives. Not even a fraction of the sheer amount of money wasted on foreign imports is directed at domestic aerospace R&D.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 18 Feb 2017 20:34

SaiK wrote:Your take? I'd not dis the article though. The truth as always is in the middle

https://bharatkarnad.com/2017/02/17/the ... -of-tejas/


One thing for sure, which no one could deny, whichever side of the table one might be seating. Any buy from foreign OEM would essentially mean less money for Indigenous capability development - RnD, design and industrial - in that respective field. I don't think any project in India, bar Nuclear weapons and strategic missiles (which is difficult to comment on for obvious reasons), is flush with funds. There is already a lack of funding across the board.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3301
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby deejay » 18 Feb 2017 20:42

Neshant, I think ACM Raha said it in the press conference immediately after IAF announced purchase of 83 Mk1A Tejas. The context was why 1A and not Mk2, IIRC (a specific question was asked). The ACM explained that "as of now" IAF was not interested in Mk2. It was not a statement on future and neither was it a policy statement. IAF was affirming support for 1A and not dishing Mk2 is how I read.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35289
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby SaiK » 18 Feb 2017 21:21

dkhare wrote:Here is a picture from BR's gallery:
Image


Good. Wonder why no groove to to tuck in when down.

hanumadu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3667
Joined: 11 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby hanumadu » 18 Feb 2017 21:35

SaiK wrote:
dkhare wrote:Here is a picture from BR's gallery:

Good. Wonder why no groove to to tuck in when down.


There is sir. Just watch closely.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15641
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby NRao » 18 Feb 2017 21:52

deejay wrote:Neshant, I think ACM Raha said it in the press conference immediately after IAF announced purchase of 83 Mk1A Tejas. The context was why 1A and not Mk2, IIRC (a specific question was asked). The ACM explained that "as of now" IAF was not interested in Mk2. It was not a statement on future and neither was it a policy statement. IAF was affirming support for 1A and not dishing Mk2 is how I read.


deejay ji,

To add to your post:

1) What Shri Raha said, was said by Shri Lamba followed by Shri Parrikar. In fact, if one follows them in sequence, each was more specific about it. To me Raha pulled the nail out of his pocket, Lamba the hammer and Parrikar hammered the nail into the coffin. Over the past few days even Shri Balaji made a statement that shuld have sent shock waves, but, as usual, we get distracted by those pointS in articles that we favor.

‘If you consider that the LCA Mk.1 will be built till 2024 and the LCA Mk.2, when ordered, should be built between 2030-35, then 2035 is good target for production of the AMCA,’ Balaji says.


That is a direct quote. Now "when ordered" seems like a positive statement, but given the other three it could be taken as a hedge.

2) I have no idea why this is a surprise. The MK2 was promised by this decade end (or earlier). The two heads sensed a delay, which is reflected in Balaji's statement to liveFist (above)

3) Sensing a delay, it looks like (I have not followed it), the MK1A was a compromise - in terms of features and time. And, even that - as far as I can see - is in trouble. First DRDO/HAL said they are in talks with SAAB, SAAB says they are willing to help as part of the Gripen deal (some reports said MK1A and others said for MK2) and then Parrikar said (in parliament) "no European" company is helping (so is there someone else helping with the MK1A?)

Frankly, from what is out there, the way I see it, even MK1A is in jeopardy of being late. I want to emphasize the problem is delivery dates and not the product.

I think the way to mitigate this problem (IF I am right) is to make MK1A1.1, 1.2, 1.3, ...... Build what you can into the LCA that moves the needle off from MK1 and towards MK1A, but is not a complete MK1A. Then as you progress, circle back and upgrade the rest. There are risks associated with this too, but less than the other option of making a complete model of the MK1A and being so late that the IAF is totally unhappy.

More in the single engine thread (sometime).
Last edited by NRao on 18 Feb 2017 21:56, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32841
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 18 Feb 2017 21:56

Our very own Bharat Karnad always manages to screw up something even when he writes stuff that will please some BRFites
The Tragedy of the Tejas
The Tejas programme has progressed in fits and starts, and been delayed interminably, in the main, for two reasons. One, the Air Staff Requirements were changed numerous times on the plea of the IAF wanting an up-to-date plane. Thus, re-design and structural alterations became necessary, for example, when the IAF demanded installation of a refuelling probe after prototypes had already been built. It imposed significant time and cost penalties and hurt the delivery deadline. Two, the IAF insisted on a ‘finished product’ with all weapons trials and fitments completed and Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) and Final Operational Clearance (FOC) secured, before accepting it.

This is contrary to the procedure followed by all other major air forces. In the US, its newest joint strike fighter, the F-35, first entered squadron service with the US Air Force and the US Marines with technical refinements, structural modifications, and proper weapons and avionics integration being carried out on the basis of continuous feedback from frontline pilots after the plane’s induction. Some serious problems with the F-35, such as with the zero- zero ejection seat system, helmet-mounted sensors, avionics, and the F-135 power plant, are all being corrected even as the aircraft is flying around. This rigmarole is called ‘concurrency’, meaning induction and capability improvements happening simultaneously after the user-service has taken charge of the combat plane. In the case of the Tejas though, the onus is entirely on the development/ production unit to put in IAF’s hands a battle-ready fighter aircraft, inclusive of the promised weapons load. It reflects IAF’s reluctance to take ownership of the Tejas even after it has proved its druthers. The truly dastardly aspect is that the standard applied by the IAF to the LCA does not apply to imported aircraft. Thus, the Mirage 2000 inducted in 1985 flew unarmed for the next three years because the contracted weapons had not been delivered. It was political prompting alone that hastened the formation of the so-far-only-Tejas unit in the Air Force, the 45 Squadron with only a handful of LCAs, based in Sulur, Andhra Pradesh.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3301
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby deejay » 18 Feb 2017 22:56

shiv wrote:Our very own Bharat Karnad always manages to screw up something even when he writes stuff that will please some BRFites
The Tragedy of the Tejas
... the 45 Squadron with only a handful of LCAs, based in Sulur, Andhra Pradesh.


Sulur, Andhra Pradesh vs Bangalore, Kerala. :D I think it is poor proofing nothing else.

The rest is his opinion.

suryag
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2890
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby suryag » 19 Feb 2017 00:05

Ithink he mistook sulur for sulurpeta(sdsc sriharikota)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5407
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 19 Feb 2017 05:28

deejay wrote:Neshant, I think ACM Raha said it in the press conference immediately after IAF announced purchase of 83 Mk1A Tejas. The context was why 1A and not Mk2, IIRC (a specific question was asked). The ACM explained that "as of now" IAF was not interested in Mk2. It was not a statement on future and neither was it a policy statement. IAF was affirming support for 1A and not dishing Mk2 is how I read.

+1. I remember when Raha sahab spoke. He was speaking of the 1A orders. And said Mark 2 will be ordered when it is ready. But no plans as of now. Inside news is that IAF is supportive of Mk2.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ashishvikas » 19 Feb 2017 13:04

HAL hopes to manufacture 1000 helicopters in next 10 years

LCA discussing from 2:10 - 6:20

- If Outsourced pvt companies can start supplying fuselage/wings, Production rate can be 16+.

- At the end Hawks & SuMKIs line is getting closed. (So you better concentrate on 2 LCA lines now. :D )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbpMwM4WMD8

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32841
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 19 Feb 2017 16:59

This is what ACM Raha said, in his own words. He had earlier rejected terminology lie 1 1A, 2 etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8skV2Do9Ms

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14107
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Karan M » 19 Feb 2017 22:21

FWIW, inside info?
http://www.forceindia.net/TheNextBigCall.aspx

LCA original Air Staff Requirements will be met only by LCA Mk II of which four squadrons are planned. If all goes well the IAF may have 14 Tejas squadrons with 294 aircraft. The Mk II is a new aircraft and will require extensive flight testing.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14107
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Karan M » 19 Feb 2017 22:44

123 aircraft with 6 squadrons. 4 more will just add 64 more. So that's 187.. not 290+

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi Verma » 19 Feb 2017 23:53

I think too much importance is given to various ACMs utterances who have a short duration at the top. They give answers to allow the reporters to fill with words.

There needs to be a long term program management office that controls a program like LCA (also for Arihants, Arjuns, IAC etc) , and only they should set time lines, requiments, production, and only they should be allowed to utter words for the reporters.

I deal with a lot of defence personell and they have very super low trust with desi manufacturing (HAL and others).

And yet DRDO, etc keep making proclamations about "will do this in future, will do that in future"... No body's buying it... Literally and Figuratively...

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14107
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Karan M » 20 Feb 2017 01:57

Agree about the program office.

As regards not buying it, the massive orders for DRDO equipment in the pipeline counter the statement about "nobody buying it". The organization will continue to be targeted by vested interests and ignorant commenters in the MSM and elsewhere, but the more Agnis Akash and Pinakas enter service etc, the more the positives will outweigh all the propaganda.

A few recent orders alone for specific programs are massive, each handed out after extensive trials. The main aim of GOI should be to ensure local focus continues and PSU import screwdriver is not replaced by elsewhere private screwdriver. That can only happen if they significantly incentivize local industry.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46922
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 20 Feb 2017 02:19

Karan M wrote:FWIW, inside info?
http://www.forceindia.net/TheNextBigCall.aspx

LCA original Air Staff Requirements will be met only by LCA Mk II of which four squadrons are planned. If all goes well the IAF may have 14 Tejas squadrons with 294 aircraft. The Mk II is a new aircraft and will require extensive flight testing.

Karan M, Can we put all that info on a ppt milestone chart format?
Horizontal is calender years. Vertical is Aircraft type.

prabhug
BRFite
Posts: 158
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby prabhug » 20 Feb 2017 11:18

I have a doubt.Is the initial ASR asked by IAF is available ? If so can we analyse to see what was in there ? Is there any fighter aircraft today available with that specification and the cost IAF wants ?

gaurav_w
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 07 Oct 2016 11:23

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby gaurav_w » 20 Feb 2017 11:52

I also could not find the initial ASR on google. Would be eye opening to see what the initial ASRs were.
The CAG report says - Many of the LCAs' shortcomings are due to our forces' love with light weight concept. The reduced payload, range, lack of internal space for many packages etc. because we wanted a MIG21 replacement. But then again would it be justifiable to hold IAF for ASR's defined in 1985. Lot has changed in the battle space since then.

Can we blame ADA, HAL - well they have designed and developed a lot of tech from scratch, we are on cusp of having a home grown product actually laying the foundation for aerospace in India.

IMVVHO what we as a nation can best do is produce LCA in numbers, do multiple iterations and keep improving the product till our forces absolutely fall in love with it.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ks_sachin » 20 Feb 2017 12:17

gaurav_w wrote:I also could not find the initial ASR on google. Would be eye opening to see what the initial ASRs were.
The CAG report says - Many of the LCAs' shortcomings are due to our forces' love with light weight concept. The reduced payload, range, lack of internal space for many packages etc. because we wanted a MIG21 replacement. But then again would it be justifiable to hold IAF for ASR's defined in 1985. Lot has changed in the battle space since then.


Ah! the definition of light has changed over time......

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 59338
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 20 Feb 2017 13:21

Image


Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8892
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 20 Feb 2017 14:54

Singha wrote:Image


I am willing to bet China's share of imports especially from Russia Dwarfs us. I think most of this reverse Engineering is BS, it is nothing but Russian Exports being as passed of Chinese Build.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19140
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Austin » 20 Feb 2017 16:03

Despite US Sanctions, This Aerospace Engineer from Odisha Gave India Its First LCA – Tejas

http://www.thebetterindia.com/87665/tej ... na-odisha/

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 59338
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 20 Feb 2017 16:36

yes ofcourse Aditya_V - its the same thing just accounted for in the bill differently for h&d reasons and to placate enemies like india. sometimes important pieces of the system are sold or slightly modified. sometimes silent partner consultancy is done like kamov for their attack helis.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 20 Feb 2017 17:21

Karan M wrote:Rough estimate, 660 odd TRMs, each of around 7.9W peak power.
For reference: my post from October 2015
viewtopic.php?p=1922326#p1922326


Some infor on Uttam from my side. My knowledge of avionics is limited so asked only some simple questions. I was having general chat with a young lady there who works on the SW side and with a more senior guy for few minutes. Expressed my gratitude for working for the nation's progress.

- It has ~700 TR modules
- Expected range 150km for 2m2 target size.
- Weight of entire package is 110kg.
- GaAs based. No GaN so far. Earlier GaAs was procured from US, but they sanctioned it few years ago (may be 4yr ago?) After that, now we make GaAs TRMs in India.
- They have 3 prototypes so far and by end of the year it would be 6. some more might be built.
- All SW coding is done - all modes are covered - A2A, A2G, SAR etc. What's remaining is putting it on a Fighter and test/debug. But LDRE seemed very confident that they can fully qualify Uttam on LCA within 2yrs.
- Extensive ground testing done. They had done a Tech Demo project in the past where they built small AESA radar and flight tested it on helicopter. THey have run through entire dev cycle on that TD. That's what gives them confidence on Uttam now, they told me.
- Right now it can search for up to 100 targets, track 20 and target 1 at a time. There is no particular limitation to increase number for simultaneous targeting as they have ample reserve processing power. Right now its kept at 1 for the ease of testing/debugging.
- Cooling requirement is of 3.6kW. IIRC, LCA has heat exchanger qualified for 3.5kW already (IR may remember better, its from one of the tenders). So Uttam may need some minor changes on that front.
- A lot of experience from Netra AWACS is helping the Uttam project.


I have some pictures, one with a close up view of individual TR module. I am not sure if its OK to put that one on internet. I took similar pic for Rafale Radar as well. But I will put other pics soon. Not getting time to process the pics. Need to compress them for uploading somewhere.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2045
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby tsarkar » 20 Feb 2017 17:40

shiv wrote:
tsarkar wrote:The below envelope for Derby needs to be determined via flight testing and published to users..
How would test pilots of the Tejas determine the envelope for a missile unless the bandits and conditions are provided by the Air Force in a realistic scenario to aid such testing, or an untested plane is simple sent to war knowing that Pakistan (or someone) will provide the bandits?

No such envelope validation can occur in India without active involvement of the Air Force. The argument made here is a slur on the Air Force and not on the Tejas. It is a different story in the US


Cybaru wrote:That doesn't mean Tejas has to worry about end game pk of a missile that it does not manufacture. The purpose here is to mate, make sure the missile is slaved to the right co ordinates and the launch doesn't destabilize the platform. The onboard computer will either provide a lock or no lock before the pilot fires and that takes all this into account (The computer will compute all the required parameters: heading, altitude, speed of both target and source before providing a solution). Sure you will need to complete the end to end testing, but like shiv asks, a target will need to be provided and the missile/radar manufacturers team/IAF based assets will need to be present to ensure all goes well unless its fired at a simulated target. Feel free to correct me.


The missile envelope comes from manufacturer.

Tejas’s weapons engagement envelope - that is a mix of aircraft plus missile performance - that would show the 3-D zone where Pk is maximum - needs to come from ADA/HAL.

This is also dependent of aircraft radar tracking, which is why the quartz radome from Cobham was critical since the indigenous radome had high losses.

Target Aircraft Data will come from IAF, as explained below.

shiv wrote:knowing that Pakistan (or someone) will provide the bandits?


IAF has already set in motion getting bandits many years back. Since 2005

We all know India doesn’t allow foreign militaries to base ships, tanks and aircraft in India. There is an exception to that rule.

https://www.telegraphindia.com/1051110/ ... 459186.asp

Thursday, November 10, 2005

New Delhi, Nov. 9: The Kalaikunda air force station is for hire. Singapore’s air force has asked for use of its facilities and is negotiating a price with the Indian government.

The island nation and city-state has a hinterland that is only a fraction of India’s. That does not afford its modern air force the airspace to conduct drills and manoeuvres of combat aircraft.

Specially built air-conditioned billets are being used for the first time to host the American pilots, technicians and engineers of the F-16 fighter aircraft and the E-3 Sentry Awacs that have flown in from their bases in Misawa and Kadena in Japan.

KKD can also accommodate a large number of aircraft. Most of the work to upgrade KKD was done by the Military Engineering Services (MES), a wing of the army that caters to all three armed forces.

So impressed was the Singapore Air Force with the potential of Kalaikunda after Sindex ’04 that they made the offer to use it and pay for the facilities.

The Singapore Air Force has also offered to bear the cost of such exercises that are meant essentially to train their own crews but will also give the Indian Air Force the experience that is necessary to hone skills of pilots.

For the Indian Air Force, such a deal will also mean opening up a revenue stream.


http://www.rediff.com/news/report/sing/20051125.htm

November 25, 2005 18:47 IST

Singapore Air Force would use facilities at Kalaikunda Air Force Station in West Bengal to train its personnel early 2006, a senior Indian Air Force official said Friday.

Singapore will send F-16 aircraft in January 2006 to carry out training programmes for its air force personnel.

The IAF air-to-ground range at Dega near Kalaikunda and the air-to-air range at Chandipur-on-Sea would be utilised for the purpose, Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Western Command, Air Marshal A K Singh told reporters in Chandigarh.

"Singapore will pay the Indian government for the use of air space as well as facilites at the air base, including landing and parking charges," he said on the sidelines of the inaugural function of annual maintenance conference of Western Air Command.


We all know Chandipur-on-Sea has instrumentation for measurement of aircraft and missile data. So we get AMRAAM firing data too :wink:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article2564.html

October 11, 2007 (by Asif Shamim) - Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) has signed a defence agreement with India to use one of its airbases to conduct joint exercises for the next 5 years.

Singapore will pay for the usage of the training facilities and any possible future upgrades required at that base during there stay.


Here is a photo dated 5th November 2014 showing F-16s at Kalaikunda

Image

https://www.offiziere.ch/?p=23103
It has been widely reported that Singapore’s aircraft are permanently stationed at the airbase for training, an assertion not yet confirmed via available imagery—though not entirely surprising.


In 2011 Singapore also deployed with a P-STAR radar and two RBS 70 surface-to-air missile firing units.


RBS-70 is also used by Pakistan

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/sin ... 49996.html

19 Jan 2017 14:24

SINGAPORE: Singapore has renewed a bilateral air force agreement with India, allowing the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) to continue its joint military training at Kalaikunda Air Force Station in India for another five years, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) announced on Thursday (Jan 19).

The Bilateral Agreement for the Conduct of Joint Military Training and Exercises in India between the RSAF and the Indian Air Force (IAF) was concluded in 2007 and last renewed in 2012.

Under the agreement, the RSAF will have regular opportunities to train with the IAF’s advanced Su-30 fighter aircraft.

The renewed agreement was signed by Singapore’s Permanent Secretary for Defence Chan Yeng Kit and India’s Defence Secretary G Mohan Kumar, and witnessed by Singapore's Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen and India’s High Commissioner to Singapore Jawed Ashraf at MINDEF on Thursday.


Image
Last edited by tsarkar on 20 Feb 2017 18:39, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, debadutta, Sushant and 30 guests