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: 15 August 2017

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.
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10675
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 09:15

One has to understand that the lobby that does not want the Arjun in the IA, will also not allow any exports of the Arjun.
Indians won't take kindly to the fact, that while its own army made excuses and rejected a really solid product, some other nation used it and respected it.
A lot of people don't want any success out of DRDO, and the same will apply to every DRDO product, plenty of netas in Delhi, plenty of babus in MOD and otherwise in Delhi, happily willing to scuttle an Indiginous product for a fistful of dollars, roubles or yuan

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9667
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby sum » 14 Nov 2017 09:21

brvarsh wrote:I say HAL should be given a list of friendly nations that it can sell Fighter Jets to and let them build LCA for foreign countries that need such a fighter. Let them manage it as a business, get funding and build upon it. It will also serve a purpose very critical - Let them fail on their own and realize what it means to deliver by the promises they make.

Do you really believe any country will touch it with a barge pole when own air force is putting out not too flattering info about its capabilities?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2017 09:23

Cain Marko wrote:...

But imho at least 200 LCA are on the cards.

...


Only 40 are certain at this point.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2017 09:25

sum wrote:
brvarsh wrote:I say HAL should be given a list of friendly nations that it can sell Fighter Jets to and let them build LCA for foreign countries that need such a fighter. Let them manage it as a business, get funding and build upon it. It will also serve a purpose very critical - Let them fail on their own and realize what it means to deliver by the promises they make.

Do you really believe any country will touch it with a barge pole when own air force is putting out not too flattering info about its capabilities?


Yes, a "three-legged cheetah" at home would sound like "six-legged cheetah" abroad :P

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2764
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Nov 2017 09:39

Well, maybe I'm optimistic but I think at least 200 will see the light of day. I have multiple reasons...
1. The present GOI will have hell to pay for and answer to if they ignore Desi fighter totally. Opposition will be all over them. Conversely, they'll look really good if they can make the tejas come through. Great brownie points.

2. IAF truly can't ignore their shortage in numbers in the short term and will have little choice but to take what HAL can produce, even mk1 at foc standards if it simply wants to even maintain current strength. We know that sef probly won't come in numbers till 2025. In the meantime they will lose bisons and floggers, there will be a desperate need to replace these, which is where the tejas comes in.

3. This would be amongst the cheapest ways to get to the large numbers needed - 55+ sqds in the long term -
2035+


But the iaf has been hankering for a single engine fighter with much more range and capability than mk1 Tejas for decades for reasons best known to them. So SEF will probly come as well. I can now see an opportunity here for the mk2, but it is very slight depending largely on how long it takes to acquire the sef and develop the mk2.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2764
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Nov 2017 09:41

srai wrote:
sum wrote:Do you really believe any country will touch it with a barge pole when own air force is putting out not too flattering info about its capabilities?


Yes, a "three-legged cheetah" at home would sound like "six-legged cheetah" abroad :P


Not necessarily. In an open society criticism of local programs is not uncommon.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2017 09:48

Mk.2 is a minimum 10-year development & qualification cycle. There are no shortcuts there. The longer the delay in sanctioning the project for a full-scale R&D the less likely it will happen. Probably 1-to-2 year window; after that it will be too late as the production green light would come post 2030.

Mk.1A is at least a five-year R&D cycle before production. The project hasn't even begun officially. That means the next "83" LCA order are in a limbo much like going from Arjun MBT Mk.1 to Arjun MBT Mk.2.
Last edited by srai on 14 Nov 2017 09:53, edited 1 time in total.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2764
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Cain Marko » 14 Nov 2017 09:52

Yes, that's why I don't think the mk2 has much of a chance. It will simply take too long.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2017 10:01

^^^
At this juncture, hard to see LCAs in the IAF beyond the 2 Mk.1 squadrons. There is a possibly of another 4 Mk1A but there is a big uncertainty as to when those would be ready for production. Unless we see more Mk.1 orders (or switch from Mk1A to Mk1) to keep the production lines running in the next couple of years, LCA seems destined to be in service in limited quantities.

The user's preference has shifted to "medium" category.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10675
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 10:04

The floodgates will hopefully open with Mk 1A orders
But the project is being delayed by the AESA radar? Once that is shortlisted, there will be many rounds of testing for weapons integraton with the radar and the software

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2017 10:06

Gagan wrote:The floodgates will hopefully open with Mk 1A orders
But the project is being delayed by the AESA radar? Once that is shortlisted, there will be many rounds of testing for weapons integraton with the radar and the software

Yes, except that the current production run for 40 Mk.1 would end around 2019/20. We are looking at a production gap of few years until Mk1A is ready.
Last edited by srai on 14 Nov 2017 10:06, edited 1 time in total.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10675
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 10:06

Radome is done, In flight refueling arm is done, relocating some of the internal hardware for easy maintainability is mostly done.
Some weight reduction by removing the dead weight plates was to be done, and then the AESA.

OBOGS is in the works?

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10675
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 10:06

They will most likely order more MK1s and then upgrade them later to 1A std

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3574
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby srai » 14 Nov 2017 10:07

Gagan wrote:They will most likely order more MK1s and then upgrade them later to 1A std

Remains to be seen. No indications of such as yet.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9162
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Yagnasri » 14 Nov 2017 10:19

sum wrote:
brvarsh wrote:I say HAL should be given a list of friendly nations that it can sell Fighter Jets to and let them build LCA for foreign countries that need such a fighter. Let them manage it as a business, get funding and build upon it. It will also serve a purpose very critical - Let them fail on their own and realize what it means to deliver by the promises they make.

Do you really believe any country will touch it with a barge pole when own air force is putting out not too flattering info about its capabilities?


Of course we need to find someone like Pakis. :mrgreen:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47919
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 14 Nov 2017 11:45

Gagan, The radome bit.
Is Cobham.supposed to supply all the quartz radome or there is local Indian mfg.?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9226
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Aditya_V » 14 Nov 2017 11:48

I hope someone has some sense and orders MK1's today, say 20-25. We need to produce 24 aircraft from 2020 onwards, I wish this can be done without the import lobby attention who all can be put in a separate Silo and deal with negotiations for the SE fighter with impossible targets.

brvarsh
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 03 Mar 2011 20:29

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby brvarsh » 14 Nov 2017 13:14

Yagnasri wrote:
sum wrote:Do you really believe any country will touch it with a barge pole when own air force is putting out not too flattering info about its capabilities?


Of course we need to find someone like Pakis. :mrgreen:

For what we know is LCA is not an incapable fighter, it is just inadequate for what IAF is looking for. Each fighter has a profile and what does not suit us may be more than adequate for many nations - Africa, South America, South East Asia specially when the price point would be so great against any of its competition.
Remember China has stuffed JF-10 over Pak's throat.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 184
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ashishvikas » 14 Nov 2017 17:24

‘Major boost’ to the LCA Tejas program & ‘reposes faith’, says HAL as IAF Southern Command chief Air Marshal RKS Bhadauria takes a 30-minute solo sortie today.

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/930402975935270912

nash
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby nash » 14 Nov 2017 17:50

Air Marshal RKS Bhadauria, the same person, who candidly accept the wrong doing in case of Marut and support the LCA and AMCA programme in the video posted by JayS in AMCA thread.

This very much shows that LCA has some backing of IAF but IMO currently IAF looking for 123 LCA only.

Lot depends on HAL execution and what happen to SE-MII.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9162
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Yagnasri » 14 Nov 2017 17:55

Major boost??? Where do these fellows live? HAL by now needs to realise that IAF as a whole is not going to support LCA unless HAL also tries to sell their product hard. HAL simply not getting it. They first keep their house in order and convince/ take up with the Minister or PMO if they want to have any meaning full orders beyond 40 units. If they are sleeping then they will get a screwdriver of F16 or something else. In fact, that may be their desire all along.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5086
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Dileep » 14 Nov 2017 18:02

sum wrote:
brvarsh wrote:I say HAL should be given a list of friendly nations that it can sell Fighter Jets to and let them build LCA for foreign countries that need such a fighter. Let them manage it as a business, get funding and build upon it. It will also serve a purpose very critical - Let them fail on their own and realize what it means to deliver by the promises they make.

Do you really believe any country will touch it with a barge pole when own air force is putting out not too flattering info about its capabilities?


A little known light fighter called Gnat comes to mind :)

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5086
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Dileep » 14 Nov 2017 18:10

MK2 is dead. Long live MK2 (aka MK1A or whatever plane that has essentially the same airframe and engine as now).

Planes will get built and stuff will get phased in as they mature, and get retro-fitted into existing airframes. Orders will happen as the existing orders gets executed.

Meen-avial.. some SEF will be ordered to keep the numbers up.

That is what my 2 paise.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2649
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby JayS » 14 Nov 2017 18:40

Dileep wrote:MK2 is dead. Long live MK2 (aka MK1A or whatever plane that has essentially the same airframe and engine as now).

Planes will get built and stuff will get phased in as they mature, and get retro-fitted into existing airframes. Orders will happen as the existing orders gets executed.

Meen-avial.. some SEF will be ordered to keep the numbers up.

That is what my 2 paise.


:-? :((

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35361
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby SaiK » 14 Nov 2017 21:15

http://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/b ... 635763.cms

Meanwhile, the IAF is said to soon issue a Request for Information (RFI) for acquiring 114 fighter jets. The IAF is said to prefer these jets instead of the advanced version of the Tejas due to its limited capabilities.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35361
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby SaiK » 14 Nov 2017 21:18

JayS wrote:
Dileep wrote:MK2 is dead. Long...
That is what my 2 paise.

:-? :((

The existence of Mk2 naam may be in convalescent phase but the capabilities are not going to be dead as long we all are live-force and supporting AMCA.

JMT

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14485
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karan M » 14 Nov 2017 21:43

SaiK wrote:http://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/bangalore/others/fight-of-the-phoenix/articleshow/61635763.cms

Meanwhile, the IAF is said to soon issue a Request for Information (RFI) for acquiring 114 fighter jets. The IAF is said to prefer these jets instead of the advanced version of the Tejas due to its limited capabilities.


One more stupidity due to the RM-PM disconnect viz Parrikar and Modi. Instead of 123 Rafales or whatever fighter, we now have two lines one being a SEF (114) and now Rafales (36) and the IAF is clearly taking this entire shindig as a means to import even more fighters. None of which will be equal to a true 5G fighter in RCS reduction. So IAF will now ask for imported 5G planes next. What a farce. After all its ills of commission and omission in the LCA program, the IAF continues to try and stop the project in its tracks with motivated submissions to decision makers, yet the powers that be continue to prevaricate. I mean seriously, given the IAFs track record in this matter regarding indigenous fighter programs (first the Marut and now the LCA), is any MOD official /Politician stupid enough to believe they truly will support the AMCA as versus using it as a stalking horse to import the next F-35 or whatever? This import addiction has become a mania now and the MOD is equally to blame for creating it. If the decision to procure 126 MRCA had been taken and followed through as a single order, the IAF wouldn't be coming up with such strategems to import additional fighters in the SEF category at the expense of LCA program. The SEF are even further behind the Rafale in capability making the need for a 5G platform even more paramount. And while the IAF is inducting 4.5G platforms with limited potential in the coming decade, most of the world will be transitioning to 5G platforms en masse. And the IAF is spending so much on these 4.5G fighters, they will not even be available in numbers like a LCA. So penny-packet, spread thin purchases, while locking in capax - brilliant planning all around. And while all this is going on, HAL is busy talking up the Hawk and HTT-40, whither the Mk1A. While Neros at MOD fiddled.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Rakesh » 15 Nov 2017 01:04

Karan: Be wary of criticizing the IAF. The self appointed, moral police on BRF will jump on you! Air Marshals are allowed to trash local programs with nonsense claims, but those claims must never be questioned. Because we are not "aware" like them. We are just to blindly believe everything they say. That is a Spears-esque belief system. See below and we all know how that turned out :)

This is the transcript of what she said (I am placing the word IAF wherever applicable) --> "Honestly, I think we should just trust the IAF in every decision they make and we should just support that. You know and ummm...Be Faithful in what happens. Q. Do you trust the IAF? A. Yes I do."

Link (in case) of the youtube video below does not work ---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qPWkjk5nNc

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Rakesh » 15 Nov 2017 01:06

Cain Marko wrote:Admiral sir, I'll respond to your last post in our conversation a bit later as it requires some time and more attention.

Don't bother Cain-ji. They don't even want the plane...what is the point of discussing? It's okay.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Kartik » 15 Nov 2017 01:37

Air Marshal RKS Bhadauria with the No.45 Squadron, after his solo flight on SP3

Image

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47919
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 15 Nov 2017 01:59

Rakesh wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Admiral sir, I'll respond to your last post in our conversation a bit later as it requires some time and more attention.

Don't bother Cain-ji. They don't even want the plane...what is the point of discussing? It's okay.



Cain Marko, Please do for our knowledge sake.


Rakesh no need for despondence.

srai put it in perspective.
Mk1A will be 5 years development.
Mk2 will be 10 years development and probably needs Mk1A.

So bird in hand is worth two in bush.

Most likely the 123 will be Mk 1 with Mk1A features.
This gets to 6 squadrons with 20 planes. Its possible could be 6 squadrons a@ 18 planes and one less number @ 15.

The SEF is half a Rafale.

Rafales were supposed to be 126 MMRCA.

Initial 36 were ordered. Realistically expect another 36 for total 72. i.e. 4 Squadrons.

Add SU-30MKIs to make up shortfall.

Meantime setup a taskforce under Dr. S. Christopher(he seems to have the fire in belly unlike other chiefs) with HAL MD, IAF Vice Chief, GTRE chief, ADA, LRDE to work on: LCA mfg, AESA, Engine as project swim-lanes with 3 month milestones. Let tehm come up with the milestones but end goal is 39 squadrons by 2025.

And Dr. Christopher reports only to RM on this LCA priority task force.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47919
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 15 Nov 2017 02:00

Didn't ACM Raha say IAF does not care for the Mk number but just gives them the planes?

I would like exact quote for it shows the requirement.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 854
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby KrishnaK » 15 Nov 2017 02:08

Rakesh wrote:Karan: Be wary of criticizing the IAF. The self appointed, moral police on BRF will jump on you! Air Marshals are allowed to trash local programs with nonsense claims, but those claims must never be questioned. Because we are not "aware" like them. We are just to blindly believe everything they say. That is a Spears-esque belief system. See below and we all know how that turned out :)
What if the Air Marshals say the same - blindly believe DRDO/ADA/HAL will deliver numbers they're looking for with the SEF, in the same time as say Lockheed ? Look at it from the perspective of mitigating risk. What happens if MK2 ends up taking 10 more years ?

sommuk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 18 Jul 2017 20:07

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby sommuk » 15 Nov 2017 02:14

Bangladesh could be a potential market for Tejas. They have a different operational profile to India. They are considering Su 30MK2 for maritime strike role
Last edited by sommuk on 15 Nov 2017 02:21, edited 1 time in total.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Rakesh » 15 Nov 2017 02:16

ramana wrote:Rakesh no need for despondence.

I am very sorry.

BTW, how can I contact you via email?

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14485
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karan M » 15 Nov 2017 02:23

There will be no more Su-30s until and unless a projection is made for attrition related catch-up. The Su-30 is yet to recieve some of the technology the IAF wants in its ORBAT, even as an upgrade.

The Rafale comes with an AESA radar, an integrated EW suite, significant RCS reduction & sensor fusion plus long range BVR AAMs. The Su-30 MKI has a PESA radar of equivalent performance in some criteria but behind an AESA in several parameters, the EW suite is still WIP (to be fielded by 2019, a full two decades after induction, and even off the shelf Russian answers are too heavy and make the aircraft vulnerable), the AAMs are yet to be proven (Russian ones that is), the sensor fusion remains to be seen.

In short, the Rafale was to just jump the AF to a degree below stealth and be ready from day one (or so the IAF believes). However, how valid te Rafale will be against PLAAF's J-20 or S-3xx SAMs will remain to be seen.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3980
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Rakesh » 15 Nov 2017 02:45

KrishnaK wrote:What if the Air Marshals say the same - blindly believe DRDO/ADA/HAL will deliver numbers they're looking for with the SEF, in the same time as say Lockheed ? Look at it from the perspective of mitigating risk. What happens if MK2 ends up taking 10 more years ?

Mk2 is done. No more Mk2.

The IAF is presently at 33 squadrons. 5 - 6 MiG-21 squadrons + 3 - 4 MiG-27 squadrons are due for retirement by 2025.

After all the tamasha (RFI - where we are at right now, RFP, Trials, Downselect, Negotiations and then Contract Signature) is done, it will be in the early 2020s (optimistic timeline). I can post that article for you if you like. As per Lockheed Martin's own execs, it will take three years from contract signature to delivery of the first plane. That is the industry standard. Perfect example is the Rafale deal, which was signed in Sept 2016 and the first batch is due to arrive in Sept 2019 and all 36 are expected to be delivered by 2022.

It will be 2026 (at the earliest) when the first of 18 flyaway aircraft arrive from LM or Saab. Only then can the local production begin, as indicated in the MoD RFI.

Tejas aircraft capability to be enhanced
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/t ... 398063.ece

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) was undertaking the enhancements and was in the process of setting up another assembly line at a cost of ₹130 crore to increase production rate from the present eight to 16. The second line would be ready by 2019 when Mk-1A began production, the source stated.

₹130 Crore = $20 million USD (way cheaper than spending $15 - $25 Billion USD on adding a new fighter to the inventory)

16 aircraft x 7 years (2019 - 2025) = 112 aircraft. Now imagine if additional lines are built (replacing the Rambha line and Hawk line)? Advise the Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 suppliers that production is being ramped up, so they should plan accordingly as well.

As Ramana-ji said, the will to implement is needed. That is all. The GOI and the IAF certainly have the will to go through an asinine process of acquiring a SE fighter.

How many airworthy planes will LM (& Tata) have built by 2025 with the F-16 or Saab (& Adani) with the Gripen? Zero.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14485
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karan M » 15 Nov 2017 02:47

Rakesh wrote:Karan: Be wary of criticizing the IAF. The self appointed, moral police on BRF will jump on you! Air Marshals are allowed to trash local programs with nonsense claims, but those claims must never be questioned. Because we are not "aware" like them. We are just to blindly believe everything they say. That is a Spears-esque belief system. See below and we all know how that turned out :)

This is the transcript of what she said (I am placing the word IAF wherever applicable) --> "Honestly, I think we should just trust the IAF in every decision they make and we should just support that. You know and ummm...Be Faithful in what happens. Q. Do you trust the IAF? A. Yes I do."

Link (in case) of the youtube video below does not work ---> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qPWkjk5nNc



R-man, we live in a democracy, flawed but still and sometimes, irrespective of how much we admire the larger organization its flawed decisions need to be called out.

Way back, I was one of those who pointed out the T-90 was a flawed decision and would be a boondoggle. Its been what, 18 years, and the flaws in that purchase have not been fixed and official after official in the IA instead of admitting the flaws, has sought to stick with organizational omerta and ignoring sunk costs, has committed more and more to the same shindig.

This is the same organization whose youngsters die in droves in anti-insurgency ops to protect the rights of us all, including the kinds in the Kashmir mange azaadi crowd. One can support them where its required (and we all have) without being lumped in with the latter crowd.

Many officers off the record will admit, that many procurement decisions in their day were severely flawed. However, organizational honor means they will never speak up.

Add to this the alternatives are from Indian suppliers who are automatically distrusted, and the support for imports becomes even clearer. Add HAL's toxic behavior (import or local, we are set) and the mess becomes worse.

Same for the GOI. I voted for them, support them, but that does not mean I automatically must and support such flawed decisions. In many cases, they are "winging it" and when that damages Indian interests, we must and should speak up.

I don't think that by sitting quiet and letting any self declared moral police threaten everyone on the forum (like one guttersnipe who was doing it) should detract any of us from telling the truth.

Too often, our politicians, our big bureaucrats and yes, even some Air Marshals, Generals forget they are part of a larger whole and their public bickering at others expense is demoralizing whole groups.

The same way some Generals mocking IAF contributions in 1999 sent the wrong message. The same way today some IAF submisson to the Parliament saying Tejas is this, that, based on specious data demotivates our scientific community & guess what, if they walk, we as Indians suffer, because the next group who comes after the first gen would rather work in a cushy MNC set up rather than work on such a thankless project, only to have their lives work trashed by some journalist who wants salacious headlines and has been leaked motivated info by some IAF/MOD person so as to score the imports.

This sort of behavior is inexcusable and the blame firmly falls on the leaker, whether at MOD or IAF and also on the fact the comparisons are flawed.

By all means point out the Tejas is NOT a F-16, but do so on valid data & apples to apples comparisons & then also have the guts to take on your political masters and tell them to their face, it was they who sabotaged the entire MMRCA by breaking it up into two farcical competitions. And then also admit that by constantly and openly stating there was no Plan B, they limited the MODs ability to ensure the Rafale was brought at a right price.

Using the LCA as a scapegoat for the MRCA fiasco is not done. Nor is sabotaging future progress by painting the image of the LCA as a problem, and hence setting up the stage for doing the same to the AMCA in future.

In 1965, one of the key reasons India stopped the war, was because there was panic, that we were running out of imported ammo. Later it turned out we had more stocks.
Today, is the situation any different?

Our services and MOD are working at loggerheads with each other, the local MIC languishes without any big-ticket orders (despite some positive movements on limited privatization), the MOF sits on files and even while the economy has been going through tough times, our defence planners ignore fiscal reality and project even more crazy capex requirements.

So does patriotism mean we just turn a blind eye to this, I am tired so spoke up. I really can't take the irony of prancing a MII Lion on stages around while a local product ready for MII is constantly run down by a motivated and ignorant press, while the very customer it was made for, thinks its all ok because some new screwdriver assembly fighter will come in turn. And what has been the record of all these screwdriver assembly programs so far? Has even ONE of these programs delivered on time and on budget per the TOT contract.

We know the answer there as well. So much for Operational Preparedness demands imports and imports alone.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14485
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby Karan M » 15 Nov 2017 02:58

The CAG reports clearly show the Su-30 TOT program was held up because the Russians did not deliver documentation, tooling, raw materials etc on time. Spares were not available either. So serviceability dropped. The maintenance facilities - both IAF & HAL delayed that, so aircraft numbers piled up awaiting fixes.. all this is what led to Su-30 availability being at 50% and lower.

Now, was the MiG-21 case any different? Or the Jaguars? Look farther behind and it will become apparent, that all these TOT kind of deals bring a lot of process related headaches which take a decade to fix.

So by what yardstick is the IAF harping on some quick assembly of SEF's making it numero uno? They know the reality. They have the grisly details of subsystem failure, OEM reneging on deals. Yet, they ignore all this & would have us believe that it is the domestic program, whose developers jump through every hoop, which is not perfect from the word go. This sort of twilight zone stuff really needs to be called out. Because when the balloon goes up, guess what T-90s dont have working TI or ammo, their engines conk out, Su-30 BVR doesnt work so import earlier gen missiles as arush order, the fancy Israeli missiles dont work, and neither do the Russian ARMs.. the list goes on and on and on.. and we are to keep mum? Its high time the mess that is Indian prourement was fixed. Who cares if its services, MOD, MOF or DPSU or all together, just go for the highest reliability, economic option beyond the brochure specs.

Highly Sanctionable fighters (where almost all LRUs are imported) or vapour ware (in flight tests, will be ready, one day) are apparently preferable to a domestic fighter which is available now (but which has to go get an AESA which no AF plane today has bar the yet to be inducted Rafale). What is this but whimsical decision making?

And what is the MOD swilling in thinking that two fighter lines in India are cheaper than one? What's so wrong with the Rafale that standardizing on it, in tranche orders wont work. Nuts behavior at their end driving this mess.

And while Lakh crore amounts are thrown around for such deals. We are counting 230 odd crores for AMCA and our local big-wigs tell us, local programs are expensive ! Beyond farcical.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47919
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

Postby ramana » 15 Nov 2017 03:41

KaranM, If Maj. Gen. Jetley had not up-gunned those 45 Shermans which fought at Assal Uttar (they destroyed 11 of the 50 odd Pattons) it would have been a different country.

Thank gods for CQMH Abdul Hamid (PVC), Maj. Gen Salim Caleb and Brig Theograj.

Even after war plans of the Pakis to march to Delhi the whole invasion was underplayed lest the whole looming disaster was made known to the people.


JNC and his light tank fetish and withdraw beyond Beas strategy would have lost East Punjab.

Also read the accounts of the 1965 air ops and how many Gnat plane starters did not work and the flights had to be aborted at takeoff stage itself...

Actually Maj. Gen. Sukhwant Singh in his "India's battles since 1947" laments at the paltry results compared to the money spent from hard earned Indians.

Crappy weapons and bad generals who were promoted so they wont launch a coup.

The crappy Aden guns used to jam in the Gnats.
The Mig 21 had faulty AA-2 missiles.
The famous raid on Peshawar conducted with such great risk the silly British made bombs didn't explode as fuzes were faulty. Mind you the IAF practiced for this raid ever since they got the Canberra. Duds like all the stuff the British used to sell and so eagerly salivated by the services.

Did any IAF committee look at why the fuzes didn't go off? or the Aden guns jammed? There is a blue painted 4000 lb. dud bomb at the Hindon Air Force museum.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests