Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

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.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2664
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby kit » 11 Sep 2018 23:05

Bala Vignesh wrote:I had deployed my lungi, literally, yesterday and did a little jig when I saw this news!!! It’s an incredible moment for Indian aeronautical agencies!!

Unfortunately, Singhaji is bang on the money with his point on the lack of refuelling assets! While the new 90T capacity MRTT would be great, but the numbers wouldn’t be nearly sufficient for us to handle the demand which would spread far and wide.

I personally feel for our needs it’s better to have more smaller tankers that we can spread out to take care of the demands in each sector, assisted by a MRTT/Midas. Ideally something like the A310MRTT. But considering how the of the platform is, we could actually use the A321 for this!!

Sorry about OT!!


I suppose all those 30 plus IL76 transports can be converted to tankers by palletised equipment?

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6516
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby disha » 11 Sep 2018 23:29

pushkar.bhat wrote:I am always intrigued by Indranil's comments on Gun trials. Have never been able to figure out what is the something needed from IAF?


***

[Mod (Indranil) Edit] You have got it right. Trivial as it may be, let's keep it to ourselves. There are reasons (please check your message-box). I hope you will understand.

The only thing that Disha and I are saying is that gun trials are beyond FOC for good reasons.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35990
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby SaiK » 12 Sep 2018 00:10

disha wrote:..Disha and I..

:roll: .
----
I am sure, Tejas will evolve to having many of the Rafale features in the Mk2 or ++. IAF would be seriously interested in 'triple ejector racks' for example... we must begin tranche mode with IAF, and they must buy in blocks.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2664
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby kit » 12 Sep 2018 01:12

Does someone remember how Moog's actuators held up the Tejas development due to US sanctions?

Now this " Vaidya informs us that Godrej Aerospace has successfully developed actuators for the Tejas fighter, a high-tech component that has been sourced so far from US company, Moog. No more than 73 Tejas aircraft will use Godrej actuators, but that seems to worry nobody."

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6931
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Indranil » 12 Sep 2018 02:00

US did not sanction the use of the actuators in LCA, but they did sanction their use in strategic UAVs (Rustom) and missiles (Nirbhay).

On LCA, they are still using Moog actuators. The Godrej developed ones are designed by ADA and ISRO. Currently in testing. Will be incorporated later.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2333
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JTull » 12 Sep 2018 02:06

kit wrote:Does someone remember how Moog's actuators held up the Tejas development due to US sanctions?

Now this " Vaidya informs us that Godrej Aerospace has successfully developed actuators for the Tejas fighter, a high-tech component that has been sourced so far from US company, Moog. No more than 73 Tejas aircraft will use Godrej actuators, but that seems to worry nobody."


Actuators were developed by ISRO and tech was transferred to a consortium of HAL, Godrej and MTAR Hyderabad. The consortium was formed way back in 2006.

Link

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1467
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby nam » 12 Sep 2018 02:09

I hope ADA plans for a CFT for MK2.

It will free up 2 hard points and better range as well. Of course, there is drawback of excess weight, hope they can think of a good solution.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Khalsa » 12 Sep 2018 02:35

ks_sachin wrote:
Khalsa wrote:A 18 year old bottle shall be opened on Saturday Night !!
Eff Yes Moment for the Tejas team this crowd who supported and believed in the 3 legged cheetah !!


Please be nationalistic in your intake when displaying your pride!!!!!

Old Monk is more apt....

Be Indian, Drink Indian Fly Indian...


ha ha ... no my days of drinking that stuff are over my friend.
need something more like Scotch to go with my stomach.
I do however dabble a lot with some Indian scotch brands.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Khalsa » 12 Sep 2018 02:39

pushkar.bhat wrote:I am always intrigued by Indranil's comments on Gun trials. Have never been able to figure out what is the something needed from IAF?


He does a real 007 need to know on that but I suspect there is something deeper and serious (not sinister).
I have let go of it, it will be tested when it will be tested.

Who cares, we have so much work to do and so much to celebrate on other matters.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6516
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby disha » 12 Sep 2018 04:09

There is no such thing as unlimited resources. If skill+talent+knowledge is considered a resource, then that is the most low in supply. One cannot pluck skill+talent+knowledgeable persons from tree and apply it to a project like LCA/NLCA. Since if the resources are unlimited, all projects can be taken up in equal priority.

The above statement comes in the wake of posters wanting to put 'triple rack'/'conformal fuel tanks' etc. For every feature/enhancement that ppl (incl. IAF) wants to put into Tejas Mk1 for FOC, there should be an associated priority.

I think getting air-to-air refueling was way up in priority. And since this was being done for the first time, there were major apprehensions and enough buffers in time needed to be built around it.

Posters on this forum need to let this moment (inflight refueling) sink in.

Of course post the immediate mandatory lungi dance, if we jump into spontaneous lungi dances on this thread for the above event once in a while in future, mods must turn a benign eye.

Forget looking towards west, even the eastern neighbour does not have a homegrown fighter with home grown air-to-air refueling. To turn it around, put LCA at Anini ALG, takes off with an optimum load out for A2G and two WVR missiles & a centerline drop tank and then tops up both the internal fuel and the center line drop tank and punches out. This will lay the entire Sichuan and Yunnan regions under its gaze! Think of a combat radius of @1200 Km.

That has just opened up great strategic strike for LCA. So to add on to it, what should be done next? I do not think gun trials should be concentrated on. It can be moved out. I think the next thing will be to make sure that all the tests of inflight-refuelling is completed and WVR missiles incorporated. And of course all the software to fine tune this setup for A2G mode. And A2A mode with BVR capability. And send it for FOC-I.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 6516
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby disha » 12 Sep 2018 04:17

ks_sachin wrote:I feel that there is a lot of "I feel" and "I think" but the lack of aerial refuelling assets would be better highlighted by a case study that could bring this to life. Alas I am not sufficiently competent to address this....


Entire Yunnan and Sichuan opens up with this event. Both for A2G and A2A (with BVR). From DBO, entire Tibet opens up.

HAL should now buckle up and deliver 324 Mk1/Mk1A planes over the next decade.

Nishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 06 Mar 2018 04:39

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Nishn » 12 Sep 2018 08:25

Mid-air refuelling needs an altogether new paradigm of thinking. While the primary objective is to increase the LCA endurance significantly, the future battle space and theatre of conflict may not just be the Pak-Tibet frontier. Due consideration should be given to the Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal/Andamans, Lakshadeep and extended missions into the Indian Ocean rim countries.

The one platform that comes into mind is the C-130. There are surplus ones becoming available, with a lot more countries upgrading to the J variant like the ones IAF operates. These surplus C-130's have a good amount of life in them and they should be quite affordable. Now that the IAF has built up enough experience on the type, induction of another 6 or 8 for a start should not be a problem.
IAI could help with the refurbishing and conversion into tanker role.

With the future induction of Black Hawk variants/Romeo's, AH-64's and Chinooks into the fleet in the not too distant future, C-130's would be an ideal asset to extend mission radius of all these platforms as well, along with the LCA. I am looking at a platform that would be able to handle itself out of 4,000 ft. runways, with minimal ground support and facilities including future island based runways and there is nothing like a 4 engine turbo prop rather than a IL-76 Heavy.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4641
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Neshant » 12 Sep 2018 08:53

China's entire air battle strategy against the USN is shooting down their air refueling tankers so they don't get to refuel American fighter planes operating in the region. They would be attempting the same against India.

Kersi
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Kersi » 12 Sep 2018 14:55

disha wrote:Forget looking towards west, even the eastern neighbour does not have a homegrown fighter with home grown air-to-air refueling. To turn it around, put LCA at Anini ALG, takes off with an optimum load out for A2G and two WVR missiles & a centerline drop tank and then tops up both the internal fuel and the center line drop tank and punches out.
.



Does Anini have a ALG ?

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1467
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby nam » 12 Sep 2018 15:08

Rafale first flight : 1986
First induction: 2001.
15 years.

LCa First flight: 2001
First Induction: 2016, let do 2017.
16 years

This is a good comparison as Rafale would not had everything done on day 1.

Let me take this occasion to congratulate a bunch of people who started with a piece of paper, no 4 gen ecosystem, no experience of FBW, no BVR integration experience, no composite knowledge, shoe string budget... and foul mouthed by everyone.

You have put everyone to shame with a 100% safety record jet. Brilliant.

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 773
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 12 Sep 2018 15:27

nam wrote:Rafale first flight : 1986
First induction: 2001.
15 years.

LCa First flight: 2001
First Induction: 2016, let do 2017.
16 years

This is a good comparison as Rafale would not had everything done on day 1.

Let me take this occasion to congratulate a bunch of people who started with a piece of paper, no 4 gen ecosystem, no experience of FBW, no BVR integration experience, no composite knowledge, shoe string budget... and foul mouthed by everyone.

You have put everyone to shame with a 100% safety record jet. Brilliant.


Perfectly put 'namji'. Be Indian, Buy Indian.
Image

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 655
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ks_sachin » 12 Sep 2018 15:38

disha wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:I feel that there is a lot of "I feel" and "I think" but the lack of aerial refuelling assets would be better highlighted by a case study that could bring this to life. Alas I am not sufficiently competent to address this....


Entire Yunnan and Sichuan opens up with this event. Both for A2G and A2A (with BVR). From DBO, entire Tibet opens up.

HAL should now buckle up and deliver 324 Mk1/Mk1A planes over the next decade.

Disha,

I need some direction here.

So what would be a strike package for Yunnan. What targets would dictate a strike package composition. And then what refuelling assets reqd?

Specifics and science rather than khayal...

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2664
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby kit » 12 Sep 2018 15:49

nam wrote:Rafale first flight : 1986
First induction: 2001.
15 years.

LCa First flight: 2001
First Induction: 2016, let do 2017.
16 years

This is a good comparison as Rafale would not had everything done on day 1.

Let me take this occasion to congratulate a bunch of people who started with a piece of paper, no 4 gen ecosystem, no experience of FBW, no BVR integration experience, no composite knowledge, shoe string budget... and foul mouthed by everyone.

You have put everyone to shame with a 100% safety record jet. Brilliant.


Perseverance sir !.. it just puts India at the top rung of nations who have designed and developed fighter planes on their own despite immense odds against it .. how many western nations having all the access to tech can claim to have done that except a few ?

mody
BRFite
Posts: 396
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby mody » 12 Sep 2018 16:29

I think IAF has also asked for Software Defined Radio (SDR), as part of FoC. Hope they agree to get the same as an upgrade, as and when available.

Apart from air to air refuelling, integration of Python-V or ASRAM WVR was also part of the FoC. The operative word was integration of modern WVR missile. The other milestones are gun integration and software updates/upgrades to open up the full flight envelope and updates for account for air to air refuelling etc.
Hopefully FoC should come around December 2018.

titash
BRFite
Posts: 294
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby titash » 12 Sep 2018 19:57

From the horse's mouth:

IAF is investing heavily in Tejas, looking at 12 squadrons of Tejas Mark-2 after first 123 Mark-1A jets," Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa said.


http://defencebuzz.org/2018/09/rafale-and-s-400-purchase-will-be-critical-to-plug-gaps-in-indian-air-defence-capabilities-air-force-chief-d43f192f-0551-4ed0-ba7d-d256a6c43ae9.html

So the Tejas will ultimately see 40 + 80 + 220 = 350 odd jets. This is the final vindication of our scientists and engineers and even our politicos who kept funding going.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2664
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby kit » 12 Sep 2018 20:28

titash wrote:From the horse's mouth:

IAF is investing heavily in Tejas, looking at 12 squadrons of Tejas Mark-2 after first 123 Mark-1A jets," Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa said.


http://defencebuzz.org/2018/09/rafale-and-s-400-purchase-will-be-critical-to-plug-gaps-in-indian-air-defence-capabilities-air-force-chief-d43f192f-0551-4ed0-ba7d-d256a6c43ae9.html

So the Tejas will ultimately see 40 + 80 + 220 = 350 odd jets. This is the final vindication of our scientists and engineers and even our politicos who kept funding going.


even the Rafales production run could be less than that

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 14 Sep 2018 08:23

Sorry to bug you again but what's status of SP11 , it's more than 1.5 months since SP10 flew first time.

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby wig » 14 Sep 2018 10:41

Propaganda piece from the statesman deleted

- Karan M

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1069
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Gyan » 14 Sep 2018 10:55

Gyan, no such posts please. They merely serve to incite people. You very well know what the LCA has.

Edited by Karan M

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9822
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Aditya_V » 14 Sep 2018 11:11

Tejas was envisioned and funded as a Mig-21 replacement, it was never meant to be a Pak- FA or F-22. The reporter clearly seems worried LCA sucess will reduce imports and commissions. Shows the extent of this mafia's nexus

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15561
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 14 Sep 2018 11:49

Wig, please spare us such fourth rate propaganda from so called journos, which is politically motivated and please exercise your judgement before posting the same.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1413
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ArjunPandit » 14 Sep 2018 13:14

Karan
May y I request you to even keep such propaganda posts, helps identifying paid journalists

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3002
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Kashi » 14 Sep 2018 13:18

It was an editorial, no name as far as I could see. So it goes all the way up.

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Trikaal » 14 Sep 2018 18:19

If you write the words "Tejas" and "Statesman" in the google search, you will see how this publication has been conducting a systematic smear campaign against the Tejas for well over a year. Each time there has been positive news regarding Tejas, there has been a disparaging article in "The Statesman". You can almost match the dates down to an error of maybe a couple of days.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1069
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Gyan » 14 Sep 2018 18:26

The most important attribute required in an aircraft is that it should not fall out of the sky

LCA can fly safely and this is adequate attribute for India to support it and for Air Force to order it in numbers

Rest we can improve as we go along

Therefore I am very critical of HAL in failing to accelerate production and coming out with new excuses everyday

enaiel
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 07:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby enaiel » 14 Sep 2018 23:27

The only reliable targets published by HAL are probably from here: https://twitter.com/writetake/status/827122637327314944?lang=en
Here's #Tejas SP schedule at HAL for all those pinged me today, post my piece. 16-17: 5; 17-18: 8, 18-19: 12, 19-20: 16.

HAL goes by Fiscal Year (April to March). Lets see how many LCA Tejas they have delivered in the past Fiscal Years compared to promised since that schedule was published:

FY 2013-2014: 0 Delivered, Total Delivered: 0 (IOC-2 - SoP Frozen 20-Dec-2013)
FY 2014-2015: 1 Delivered, Total Delivered: 1
FY 2015-2016: 1 Delivered, Total Delivered: 2
FY 2016-2017: 1 Delivered, 5 Promised, 4 Short, Total Delivered: 3, Total Promised: 7, Total Short: 4
FY 2017-2018: 6 Delivered, 8 Promised, 2 Short, Total Delivered: 9, Total Promised: 15, Total Short: 6
FY 2018-2019: 1 Delivered, 12 Promised, 11 Pending, Total Delivered: 10, Total Promised: 27, Total Pending: 17

Production has been getting better, but If they significantly miss their targets this FY, then it will be harder for anyone to defend them.

* Edited post to satisfy Theeran
Last edited by enaiel on 15 Sep 2018 00:57, edited 1 time in total.

Theeran
BRFite
Posts: 134
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Theeran » 14 Sep 2018 23:51

The shorts have to be cumulative. So..

FY 2013-2014: 0 Delivered
FY 2014-2015: 1 Delivered
FY 2015-2016: 1 Delivered
FY 2016-2017: 1 Delivered, 5 Promised, 4 Short
FY 2017-2018: 6 Delivered, 8 + 4 Promised, 6 Short
FY 2018-2019: 1 Delivered, 12 + 6 Promised, 17 Pending

They can't keep going at this rate. Will never make up the numbers. IAF is right to be concerned with the timelines.

enaiel
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 07:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby enaiel » 15 Sep 2018 01:01

Does anyone know when HAL actually received the funds for the second line? I'm guessing it was sometime in 2017.
Also, we might see a delay in getting SP-21 because FOC SoP is not frozen yet.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2664
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby kit » 15 Sep 2018 02:27

enaiel wrote:Does anyone know when HAL actually received the funds for the second line? I'm guessing it was sometime in 2017.
Also, we might see a delay in getting SP-21 because FOC SoP is not frozen yet.


looks like without another line the numbers will never be in time :x

thammu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 29 Mar 2007 08:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby thammu » 15 Sep 2018 13:44

wig wrote:Propaganda piece from the statesman deleted

- Karan M


I am an occasional contributor but an avid reader of this forum - especially on the topic of LCA, Kaveri, and ISRO. Success in any of these topics makes me feel very proud as being a member soon to be a senior citizen generation, I understand the fund crunch and technology denial environment in which these successes were achieved.

But not allowing posts which have a counter view is a wrong policy. Every view should be allowed and debated. There should be enough confidence in our ability to point out the wrong representation of facts in these 'biased' columns.

Allowing only a single thread of arguments happen in condolence speeches, not in active discussion forums.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15561
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2018 04:00

Thammu, First off congratulations on being on BRF and being a contributor. Folks with age and experience on their side are always welcome and always provide good insights, so look forward to your continued stay on BRF.

Now let me address your queries.

First, off the most pertinent issue. That article did not present a counter view.
It was rubbish, plain and simple. It was poorly written, and complete trash. To summarize, IAF is ordering Rafale, so use it to score points against the LCA.

BRF has substantial reach and giving that piece of rubbish more reach to be argued about was not in India's interest or the LCA program's interest.

Second, as a moderator, who has an active interest in maintaining the quality of the forum, I should have no incentive whatsoever to allow trash articles to be somehow given more leeway and "every view to be allowed and debated" - the issue, is not one of confidence or ability, but one of time & keeping threads focused on quality, not mere quantity and whatever bile any so called "source" comes up with. At this rate, we and the forum will just drown in the amount of rot generated by such "sources".

Third, if articles are posted, then the poster should make an effort to add his commentary with it, as a point of discussion decorum, either in the article itself, or prior. This was just posted with no context whatsoever. This then causes more such posts to be made and over time, a flame war can also erupt. Again, moderator overload for zero forum benefit.

What next? Should we allow rubbish articles from SM Hali of Defence Journal fame or some random journo from the PRC and then have the discussion sidetrack for days altogether with people calling the press names, getting upset and actual useful pieces of information to be lost? Then mods have to step in, what a waste of all our collective effort.

So yes, on the occasional instance, when there is a judgement call made that articles are absolute rubbish, then only a single thread of arguments will be allowed, the sensible kind as it is in the forums and our best interest.

There was literally nothing in that article to justify its retention - nothing about the LCA, nothing about the program, nothing about its production, zip, nada, zilch. I am not even going into what it had, because for such articles any publicity is good publicity.

Fourth, please understand that the import lobby continues to attempt to run down the LCA and use every trick in the book to show it in the worst possible light. Playing into their hands by giving such pointless articles more publicity is not a positive step.

Hope this clarifies.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15561
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2018 04:11

No more discussion on this thank you. We already have a productive discussion on production numbers etc going on and I dont want it sidetracked yet again with another back and forth on a DDM rubbish piece on the LCA. Lets all focus on serious and quality points vis a vis the LCA.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15561
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2018 04:13

enaiel wrote:Does anyone know when HAL actually received the funds for the second line? I'm guessing it was sometime in 2017.
Also, we might see a delay in getting SP-21 because FOC SoP is not frozen yet.


http://www.indiastrategic.in/2018/08/20 ... -per-year/

Mr Raju said HAL will complete delivery of 12 LCA Tejas in 2018, and ramp up the production to 16 next year, thanks to the second assembly line it has set up in Bangalore, where the company is headquartered. “We are in talks with IAF for the projected order of 83 Mark IA aircraft, and keeping that in mind, a third assembly line will be set up in Bangalore itself, where the LCA is currently produced.”

HAL’s first assembly line there has the capacity to produce eight aircraft in a year.


So the line is expected to be operational in 2019.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15561
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2018 04:33

Theeran wrote:The shorts have to be cumulative. So..

FY 2013-2014: 0 Delivered
FY 2014-2015: 1 Delivered
FY 2015-2016: 1 Delivered
FY 2016-2017: 1 Delivered, 5 Promised, 4 Short
FY 2017-2018: 6 Delivered, 8 + 4 Promised, 6 Short
FY 2018-2019: 1 Delivered, 12 + 6 Promised, 17 Pending

They can't keep going at this rate. Will never make up the numbers. IAF is right to be concerned with the timelines.


The 2nd line is supposed to be up and running by March 2019.

The 3rd line for the MK1A - if memory serves - IAF wants it to go to the private sector. While laudable from the POV of building up indigenous capability, I think its a recipe for more delays and was not warranted at this point of time. :(

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2750
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby fanne » 16 Sep 2018 06:24

12 LCA in 2018 may not happen. It is until March 2019 - 6 more months, I don't see 10 more planes coming. Something is wrong somewhere...I don't see additional 6 planes coming to take the number to 8 (the capacity of the original, already sanctioned line).
Counterpoint (TOTAL SPECULATION) - This may be lost in translation (or is wishful thinking), perhaps the total capacity of HAL LCA is 8 after combining the LCA + erstwhile hawk line. The hawk line is yet not stable...in many ways even though private sector players are identified, the total committed number is way less for any player to add extra capacity. The total capacity is minimal perhaps 2-4 plane per year and that what we see coming out. Classic chicken and egg, without many planes, IAF will not evaluate and order in bulk, and without bulk, none of the player will invest in more capacity.

Ps - This is where high LCA price is coming from HAL. They are saying hey your total committed order is perhaps 20 or 40 planes (not the other 83 is 'ordered')- and for that amount, including capital cost, the plane cost a gazillion dollar.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rishi_Tri, sgopal, Vinod Ji and 42 guests