Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Jun 2012 14:50

Actually HAL had a project called HTT-35 that was displayed in first Aero India 1995 and it was on the pages of Janes All the World Aircraft since early 90's , it was a nice looking turboprop with a nice roomy cockpit and bubble all glass canopy.

I really dont know why HAL didnt pursue it , they would have easily delivered that in 6 -7 years time and by early 2000 we could have had HTT-32 replacement but some how mysteriously both the HTT-35 and LOH project of early 90's dissapeared without a trace.

May be HAL insiders can tell why they abandoned the project.

member_19648 · Post by **member_19648** » 20 Jun 2012 15:16

Austin wrote: I really dont know why HAL didnt pursue it , they would have easily delivered that in 6 -7 years time and by early 2000 we could have had HTT-32 replacement but some how mysteriously both the HTT-35 and LOH project of early 90's dissapeared without a trace.

As far as I remember, both these projects were abandoned because of lack of interest from the users (IAF) at that time, now that they are interested, both these projects have been restarted in different forms but. Unfortunately, it would take years for these to fructify. HAL is closely tied up with IAF, not the case with NAL, so the HANSA project came really well and is flying with different flying clubs.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 20 Jun 2012 18:00

Indra,

what i can't understand from the link i posted earlier is - why would HAL send RFI to the 'trainer' manufaturers if all they were interested in was the turboprop engine which meant the RFI should have been sent to the 'engine' manufacturers!! that simply means either HAL was looking at expertise other than just the engine and its integration from their foreign collaborators or wanted to speed up the project as referred in the link. whichever way i look at it, some confusion does exist. however this was in 2009.

i more than wish as you say and do beleive that HAL is capable of designing and delivering the trainer (what with both HPT-32/HPT-16 being their designs and IJT on the way). but i keep my fingers crossed - due to the confusion - and hope your beleif is not belied.

....................

Kartik wrote:The engine specs are such that a Canadian P&W PT-6A variant will be a very likely candidate. On the PC-7 MkII, they use a PT-6A-25C turboprop engine that gives a max output of 700 shp,

the following data says it is in fact 850shp derated to 700shp.

he PC-7 MkII is a training aircraft powered by a 700 shp Pratt & Whitney PT6A-25C turboprop engine with a Hartzell four-blade aluminium propeller. The de-rating of the engine from 850shp ensures low direct operating costs and a long engine life. The performance of the PC-7 MkII is docile enough for a beginner, but with sufficient power for more demanding basic phases.

Pilatus PC-7 MkII Aircraft Data

however P&W sites quotes 750shp.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 20 Jun 2012 19:19

HAL seems to be only a screw-driver turning shop. No expertise from their years of manufacture has led to new aircraft. Why is LCA production so slow? It seems that they can only produce one aircraft per year and there was a story some time ago that one of the PVs was grounded since it was being used for spares for another PV.

Perhaps the state of affairs at HAL is a result of IAF's disdain of local products and unwillingeness to follow the Navy's lead in working with domestic manufacturing organizations.

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 20 Jun 2012 19:51

Vivek K wrote:HAL seems to be only a screw-driver turning shop. No expertise from their years of manufacture has led to new aircraft.

Dhruv? LCH?

Vivek K wrote:Why is LCA production so slow? It seems that they can only produce one aircraft per year

Why should it "limited series production" be any faster than it already is?

narmad · Post by **narmad** » 20 Jun 2012 20:33

Vivek K wrote: Perhaps the state of affairs at HAL is a result of IAF's disdain of local products and unwillingeness to follow the Navy's lead in working with domestic manufacturing organizations.

You cannot entirely blame the IAF.
There might have been change in Focus/Priorities with Leadership changes @ HAL.
Who knows ...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jun 2012 20:37

IAF junior warrant officer caught at airport with 6 CDs and HDDs containing detailed war plans of Su30 sqdns based in Tezpur. found guilty by court of enquiry.
as per report in Times Now.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 20 Jun 2012 21:17

Singha wrote:IAF junior warrant officer caught at airport with 6 CDs and HDDs containing detailed war plans of Su30 sqdns based in Tezpur. found guilty by court of enquiry.
as per report in Times Now.

Not sure if DDM is rarely on a right note but they mentioned "warplans of Su-30", I wonder what that could be. I just hope its not the strenghts/weaknesses and the SoP prescribed by TACDE.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jun 2012 21:19

war plans could indicate proposed air tasking , dispersal patterns to satellite bases, patrol grids, tactics vs potential plaaf adversary types, details on munitions loadouts ....

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jun 2012 12:44

Air Force running out of trainer jets

About 24 months from now, the Indian Air Force (IAF) may face an embarrassing situation of not having enough trainer aircraft to train its new recruits with. "We are keeping our fingers crossed and hope that Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will deliver this time," a senior IAF official told NDTV.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 21 Jun 2012 20:31

well why not start looking at some sort of thirdparty in the interim especially if we are already under strain.... curtailing training is silly

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 21 Jun 2012 21:45

Mihir wrote:Dhruv? LCH?

Dhruv is the one silver lining in the 5-6 decades of HAL's existence as a screw driver operator. The LCH is a promising though a fairly young project and is still in the development phase and its success remains to be seen.

Why should it "limited series production" be any faster than it already is?

Really? So it is OK to produce 8 LSPs in 8 years? This while changes in force strengths are taking place around us. Can IAF afford to ignore these? That said going by the sorry state of affairs withe pilot training and the dismal record of procurement - AJT saga, the HPT-32 and now IJT fiascos (I hope it is not going to die), the MRCA still out in the wilderness (will it be Raffy or maybe some other a/c will make a comeback) it seems that National security has become a joke.

krish.pf · Post by **krish.pf** » 24 Jun 2012 00:19

Israeli Air Force Evaluation of the MiG-29[/color]

The “Sting” has landed

In recent months, Russia negotiates the sales of MIG-29 fighter jets to Syria. This is a good time to recall that in 1997, under a heavy cloud of secrecy, three MIG-29 “Fulcrum” ("Sting" in Russian)) landed in Israel. For several weeks, Israeli test pilots learned the plane and its weapon systems inside and out, flown numerous hours, and tested the jet’s abilities when facing Israeli fighter jets
Noam Ofir | Udi Ezion | Nikolai Avrutov

“In terms of its abilities, the MIG-29 equals those of the F-15 and F-16 jets. In some respects it even surpasses the two”, said Major N, Chief Experimental Pilot of the MIG

Three single seat MIG-29s stayed at one of the Israeli Air Force bases for a few weeks. The MIGs were secretly brought to Israel, and it was a rare opportunity for the air force to study up close what of the main interception jets used by Iran and Syria.

Lieut. Col. M was in charge of the test centre of the air force, and one of the few Israeli pilots to fly the MIG: “we are used to test foreign aircraft, as part of our purchasing procedure, but the MIG-29 was an out of the ordinary kind of test flight”, he said. “Not even for a moment did we forget that this aircraft is the most advanced strategic threat that exists at the arena today".

In order to fly the MIG-29s, the test-pilots had to undergo a special course. At the first stage, the crew learned of the special structure and systems of the jet. The language barrier was the main difficulty: the study material was all written in Russian, forcing the Israeli pilots to use a translator, and at times to improvise.

“The language post a great challenge, as the voice warning system in the aircraft, who alerts the pilot of potential malfunctions, spoke Russian”, says Lieut. Col. M. “The visual warning, that appear on screen, were all displayed in Cyrillic script as well".

Upon successful completion of the theoretical part, each pilot performed three flights with the jet.

“Since we are used to fly unfamiliar aircraft, it wasn’t a great challenge to fly the MIG-29 by ourselves right from the first time”, says Lieut. Col. M. “Within minutes sitting in the cockpit, I was comfortable. While everything around me was written in Russian, we labelled most of the instruments with English translation".

One of the things that caught the pilot’s attention was the difference in the Eastern approach to jet construction, characterising the MIG, and the western kind, typical of the F-15 and F-16. “One of the greatest tools available to the pilot in this jet, is its ability to land by itself, without the need for pilot’s involvement", Says Major N. “landing destination is entered into the computer before takeoff. In case of bad weather, or any other difficulty, hampering pilot’s ability to land, he simply needs to press a button, and the jet will land by itself. When testing the jet, we did not use this system for several reasons, but no doubt, it is a nice system. Another system worth of mentioning, is the one that stabilises the jet in case the pilot is affected by Vertigo disease, and loses his orientation in space. Such systems do not exist in western aircraft, counting on the pilot to handle such situations independently".

A serious opponent

The three jets were received at one of the air force bases, where they were thoroughly studied, and the first solo flights conducted. “I wasn’t too excited about the first solo flight on the MIG”, describes Lieut. Col. M. “What exciting, is the fact that so many people watched that premiere flight. It’s not every day that a MIG takes off the squadron’s runway. Everyone at the base stopped what they were doing to watch that jet fly".

There were several flights every day at which the weapon systems of the jets were tested. Each test flight began with a brief on the expected simulation, and each flight concluded by a thorough debrief, where both MIG pilots and those who simulated the “enemy” in Israeli jets.

“The debrief is the most serious part”, tells Lieut. Gen. G, one of the MIG-29 pilots. “This time, they were even more serious. After each flight, which last an hour, there was a two to three hours de-brief, sometimes even more”. Each of the test pilots accumulated 20 flight hours, gaining significant experience in operating the aircraft.

Studies of the aircraft confirmed it as a serious opponent in air combat. “MIG’s abilities equals and sometimes even exceeds those of the F-15 and F-16 jets”, says Major N, a test pilot. “The aircraft is highly manoeuvrable, and its engines provide higher weight to thrust ratio. Our pilots must be careful with this aircraft in air combat. Flown by a well trained professional, it is a worthy opponent".

Lieut. Gen. M shares the appreciation for the Russian aircraft: “flying the MIG was one of a kind type of experience for a test pilot. Now I know that the result of an air combat between the MIG and an Israeli fighter jet depends on how the combat develops. In a tight battle, it is a real threat. It’s an advanced aircraft, and in close manoeuvring engagements it is absolutely terrific. It makes sharp turns, it’s quick, and to my opinion, as a platform, it does not fall short of our advanced fighter jets".

Advantages and disadvantages

Test-Flying the MIG provided a lot of useful information regarding its weapon systems. “I was positively surprised by its systems”, says Lieut. Gen. G. “The different parts (Radar, helmet mounted display, and the missiles) are very well combined. The jet is equipped with an advanced air-to-air guided missiles, as well as radar guided missiles. The jet features an IRST (Infra Red Search and Track) system, which identifying targets by their heat signature, without using radar. All these, combined on a relatively good platform, result in an advanced weapons system. The MIG turned out to be an advanced fighter jet, similar to the F-15 and F-16 aircraft".

“The MIG has an excellent radar system”, says Major N. “I was also very impressed with the IRST system. The missile systems provide the jet with significant advantage. I made a good use of the Russian helmet, and I can say that it works fairly well. Having said that, it is less convenient than the Israeli system, and in some ways it falls short of it. Overall it works well".

There is a major disadvantage: difficulty to fully utilize the jet’s abilities. “One of the greatest problems of the MIG is its human engineering”, explains Major N. “Most of the systems installed are good overall, but their combination, and the user interface is cumbersome, and begs for an improvement. On several occasions, I needed a certain piece of information which was not showing on any of the cockpit instruments".

Trustworthy, Strong, Massive

Major H., an F-16 pilot underwent the MIG training course along with the test pilots, so in case of an emergency or a malfunction, he could guide the pilots over the radio on how to proceed. During the course, he also had flown the plane.

“It is a great experience for an Israeli jet pilot”, he says. “I was positively impressed with the overall simplicity of the jet. The important things are proper and simple. The ignition for example, is done with a single push of a button, following which there are only a few tests the pilot needs to perform. Its manoeuvrability was also very impressive".

For a long time, the MIG was regarded a replica of the American F-18. Major N. Had an opportunity to fly both, and to compare:

“You can see from the first glance, that there is a great resemblance between the two”, he says. “They both have a twin engine, a double tail, and an IRST system. But in contrast to the American jet, the MIG was designed with air combat as its main mission in mind. According to its designers, it can also serve as an attack aircraft as a secondary role, and it cannot carry a large amount of air-to-surface ammunition”.

Lieut. Col. G. Concludes: “The jets had very few malfunctions, and like other Russian products the MIG-29 is trustworthy, strong, and massive. The F-15 and F-16 are much more delicate, compared".

http://www.iaf.org.il/5642-35655-en/IAF.aspx

Dunno which MiG-29 variant did the Israelis get their hands on. Could be MiG-29S, or a maybe MiG-29B with N-019M Topaz.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 24 Jun 2012 08:46

^ AFAIK these were Polish MiG-29As

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 24 Jun 2012 11:22

Vivek K wrote:Dhruv is the one silver lining in the 5-6 decades of HAL's existence as a screw driver operator. The LCH is a promising though a fairly young project and is still in the development phase and its success remains to be seen.

Good. So you agree that HAL has indeed produced its own aircraft, and is not merely a screw-driver turning shop.

Really? So it is OK to produce 8 LSPs in 8 years? This while changes in force strengths are taking place around us. Can IAF afford to ignore these? That said going by the sorry state of affairs withe pilot training and the dismal record of procurement - AJT saga, the HPT-32 and now IJT fiascos (I hope it is not going to die), the MRCA still out in the wilderness (will it be Raffy or maybe some other a/c will make a comeback) it seems that National security has become a joke.

I beg your pardon in advance, for I may be wrong here. But as far as I understand, for full scale production to begin, the aircraft needs to achieve FOC and the design needs to be frozen*. Neither is the case with the LCA, as it is still under development. So why would production not be slow? Has the IAF or ADA asked for a certain rate of production? Are they complaining because HAL is corrupt/lazy/incompetent? Or is it something else? After all, a "screw-driver turning shop" should be rather good at 'license-producing' something the ADA has made, no?

Or are you of the opinion that HAL should produce a few dozen untested aircraft every year because force strengths in the neighbourhood are changing, without a mandate from the MoD?

*One might claim that the JSF is a legitimate exception to this rule. But then again, it is an exception to so many rules, I'm surprised the project isn't in more trouble than it already is.

vic · Post by **vic** » 24 Jun 2012 12:44

Most of the design work and initial test flying of ALH-Dhruv was done by European consultant companies- test pilots. It continues to be assembled with European components with negligible Indian content except assembly & testing. The only major thing HAL contributed was one decade delay in setting up production line.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 24 Jun 2012 19:03

Most of the design work and initial test flying of ALH-Dhruv was done by European consultant companies- test pilots. It continues to be assembled with European components with negligible Indian content except assembly & testing.

just to be argumentative you end up saying sh1t like that.

keep denigrating whatever good work we do and then expect more!!!

vic · Post by **vic** » 24 Jun 2012 19:36

It is a fact

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 24 Jun 2012 19:56

Could you name the European test pilots who tested the Dhruv first??

pictures??

how many tests??

Facts normally mean data like I am requesting

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Jun 2012 19:58

second that request.

rrao · Post by **rrao** » 24 Jun 2012 20:01

vic !!!!yes, HAL has taken the help of European aviation firms for ALH DHRUV . Its a known fact!!! so ,whats your problem!!!! HAL does have problems which all DPSUs have. Instead of whining constantly with a a metronome periodicity and pitch,please suggest some constructive solutions to improve the functionality,efficiency,design and development cycle times,quality of products of HAL etc..etc... I don't think you have any,other than whining...please change your attitude!!!!

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 24 Jun 2012 20:42

rrao

consultancy was not the question. consultancy is taken by folks in countries more advanced than us.

what vic said is that pretty much the whole design and testing was done by consultants ala Bandar and we essentially slapped orange paint on it.

As they say in the western's 'dem fighting words'

So vic

give us the names of the European pilots?

how many tests?

If Euopean consunltants did the whole design then again need a link which says the whole product was designed in MBB or wherever and then transferred over.

i also need a link which says x,y.z components all come from Europe

after all these are facts
then we can check it with some of the folks who visit here

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 24 Jun 2012 21:43

vic wrote:It is a fact

Vic,
If you don't mind me asking, could you corroborate your statement by showing the said facts??

If you are unable to do so, then i politely ask you to understand the myriad things involved in designing and manufacturing complex weapons of war and then make your statements.

Thanks.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 24 Jun 2012 22:35

I guess most of us have forgotten the CAG report which calmed

..about 90 per cent of the value of material used in each helicopter is procured from foreign suppliers

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Jun 2012 23:14

Abhik, that single line you have posted, without any contextual analysis, is just pointless

For instance, this business of value by cost is very misleading and needs to be understood. People have attacked the Arjun for being 50-60% imported, without even understanding that this refers to the fact that the number of non Indian major assemblies in the Arjun, which are less in absolute number vs the Indian ones, are more expensive and hence take up the cost disproportionately. So to be thorough, one should also look at all systems, airframe including electro-mechanical, avionics, and the propulsion and break it down by how many of those systems are designed and manufactured in India, and then see whether the subsystems/components were available in India at the required timeline and cost as well.

90% of the value of material does not say much - lets be charitable and take that it means both imported subsystems and raw material processed by HAL & partners into subsystems. In which case, the second part is equally important, given the dearth of aerospace grade material available within India (and at the right prices and volumes to boot). The LCA team went through enormous effort to indigenize the raw materials availability as well. So if HAL imports aerospace grade material and machines them into the desired ALH components, that has to be overlooked? Similarly, if HAL or partners import microchips of the latest vintage (given how short semiconductor market cycles are, this is a constant issue), and use these COTS components to make aerospace grade avionics for the ALH/LCH etc, is that considered?

What should be understood is that HAL is a designer and manufacturer, but it has limitations in the latter because it cannot be the end to end provider of an entire aerospace system. The world over, companies at HALs level act as platform integrators with systems integration capability. They are often supported by a network of Tier 1 OEMs, which in turn have different levels of partners supplying them. A Lockheed Martin will for instance depend on a Spirit Aerosystems or a Raytheon. These people in turn depend on a huge network of suppliers for things like microchips to alloys and what not.

In India's case, HAL is heavily vertically integrated in terms of license manufacture, and it has played a decent role in subsystem development for programs like the LCA.

But it must be understood that ab-initio development of systems, let alone the materials that go into them, is a herculean undertaking. The sort that has meant the LCA is such a mammoth task, and which is what makes some of the commentary by the IDRW chap (karan_mc) ridiculous, whinging on time and what not, and totally missing the effort required .

If HAL does the same with the ALH as ADA did with the LCA, then yes, it may be a better bet for aerospace development over the long term, but there is a price to be paid today in terms of time & lack of ready made solutions. Plus lets face it, HAL does not have the backing of a dozen labs to do systems and materials development either

HAL's approach has been to act as a designer and integrator (which too requires substantial engineering capability), and then gradually indigenize where it can.

Yes, the overall percentage of indigenization will not be at the level of a Tejas at 60-70 percent (where even the raw material has been sought to be locally developed) but its still a huge step up from the alternative, which is to import foreign choppers and knock them together claiming CKD/SKD/ license assembly translates to knowledge transfer. While it is good to set high standards, one must take the nation's overall capability into account as well.

Via the ALH/LCH programs, HAL has clearly made huge steps in understanding aerodynamics, translating it into functional engineering designs and viable products. That sort of transition is something very few companies have made. Off the cuff - there are just a handful of firms today able to make and field combat helicopters of their own design & test them to induction.

This is a very critical capability, and for all of HAL's faults of omission and commission, this sort of dogged persistence they have shown with the ALH program and now the LCH etc - deserves to be appreciated.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jun 2012 10:25

by cost the engine & gearbox itself is likely 50% of the cost of Dhruv. to my knowledge we do not make the turbomeca engines here, but get them in completed form and have overhaul facilities.
some of the avionics are also costly and imported from israel/france.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 25 Jun 2012 10:50

abhik wrote:I guess most of us have forgotten the CAG report which calmed
..about 90 per cent of the value of material used in each helicopter is procured from foreign suppliers

this was discussed long back. check Hari Nair's reply - http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 76#p926176

Hari Nair wrote:The CAG is definitely NOT a bunch of hare-brained babus as has been made out to be. I have found some of their remarks and analyses on certain aircraft acquisitions surprisingly precise and accurate. Don’t underestimate them, they are good.
However, in the case of the ALH (Dhruv), I do believe their conclusions on 80-90% imports (probably by cost percentage) being a point for audit is incorrect. Yes, most of the avionics and quite a few systems are imported but then, consider this:-
The critical high-tech main & tail rotor blades are made locally.
The entire transmission systems are made locally – all the gear boxes including the Main Gear Box (that holds the helicopter up and provides the drive from the engines to the rotors. All these essentially amount to the very core of the helicopter. Worldwide, there are just a handful of countries making these components & we are actually one of them.
The fuselage & undercarriage are all made locally – including the very critical crashworthy sections.
The ALH has been made to a very exacting Air Staff Requirement of the IAF & Indian Army and to meet all the stated objectives, it may not be possible to use everything indigenously made. In any case, a whole lot of systems & avionics are just simply NOT available locally.
Barring the US of A (and erstwhile Soviet Union), most countries do NOT make the A to Z of an aircraft. Consider this – open up a BAE (British Aerospace) navigation system LRU and don’t be surprised to find cards & chips made in Taiwan! Check out the European helicopters – all of them are multi-country projects!
It’s a globalised economy and its just plain stupid in these times to try to make every single thing at home.
The game really is to make a reliable and maintainable helicopter – that meets the performance requirements of the Services & also has a reasonable indigenous content at its core (which I believe the ALH already has).

vic · Post by **vic** » 25 Jun 2012 11:00

LCA and ALH is not comparable. LCA is an indigenous progamme in which components are imported where indigenious efforts have failed or have been delayed. ALH is import by any other name say Brahmos or Su-30MKI. and Oh yes, even the seats on ALH are imported to say the least. The design, development and setting up of the production line was contracted out to MBB. The initial (actual) test flights were by MBB pilots.

CAG are not a bunch of morons as made out to be. The basis of prosecutions and cancellation of 2G licence/s was provided by CAG. We can disagree with their analysis but the facts given by them have to be accepted eg 90% of HAL ALH is imported.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 25 Jun 2012 16:52

Vic

Day 2

Waiting for your facts

The european (MBB)test pilots who did all the initial testing of the Dhruv

no of tests

links please

PS: actually the CAG can sometimes be morons

vic · Post by **vic** » 26 Jun 2012 10:23

Demanding PAkistani level of proof does not mean facts are belied. HAL had zero! Zilch Nada input in ALH, the design, development and setting up production line was contracted out to MBB with set performance parameters.

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 26 Jun 2012 12:43

Hey you seem to be flame baiting. Not interested in biting

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Jun 2012 14:04

don't feed the troll

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 26 Jun 2012 18:13

ok so now that you have nothing

will leave it to Admins

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 27 Jun 2012 03:02

andy B wrote:via mil photos.net

Global 5000 C-GHVB IAF
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shanair/7439249466/

Does anyone know what's this abt are these for the ARC wing?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Jun 2012 03:30

andy B wrote:
andy B wrote:via mil photos.net

Global 5000 C-GHVB IAF
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shanair/7439249466/
Does anyone know what's this abt are these for the ARC wing?

Andy my man, google it:

July 25, 2012 :: Indian Air Force take delivery of Global 5000

The Indian Air Force have taken delivery of a Global 5000 from Bombardier, from an order originally destined for a Maltese customer.

Arriving at Shannon on Sunday night from St. Louis Downtown, msn 9424 / C-GHVB stayed the night before departing to Tel Aviv the next morning.

It’s unclear if the aircraft is destined for some work with Israel Aerospace Industries in Tel Aviv before final delivery, but it is understood that the Indians have been shopping for a system similar to the Raytheon developed Global Express based Airborne Stand-Off Radar (ASTOR) system deployed by the UK’s Royal Air Force recently in Afghanistan.

Bet this will be converted to something similar to a Gulfstream G550 Eitam AEW&C aircraft

The Maltese customer did not want it - and the IAF took it off the Bombardier lot. Win-win for all.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 27 Jun 2012 03:42

vic wrote:It is a fact

No it is not. You are exaggerating it by an order of magnitude.

vic · Post by **vic** » 27 Jun 2012 11:05

CAG Report

The Government of India entered into a collaboration agreement with Messerschmitt
Bolkow Blohm (MBB) - West Germany, (presently ECD6) in July 1984 for design,
development and establishment of production facilities of ALH and entrusted the same to
the Company. The Collaboration agreement provided for achievement of 13 prescribed
milestones (Annexure VII) within seven years i.e. by 1991. Subsequently, the Company
prepared (July 1992) Preliminary Project Report (PPR) for ALH, which indicated
development of ALH including first flight and type certification of basic version before
end of 1994. The PPR also revised the schedule for design freeze of utility version of
ALH to December 1993 and completion of prototypes by 1994. This resulted in extension
of collaboration agreement by four years up to 1995.

The

(even the)

consultant recommended for indigenisation level of fifty per cent of purchases of
raw material and bought out items by the year 2008. However, 90 per cent of the value of
material used in each helicopter is still imported from foreign suppliers. Even though
ALH is in production for 10 years, the Company has not been able to identify alternative
indigenous suppliers.

The real test of indigenisation is - percentage of Raw Material components. Normally like in TATRA, ARV, Brahmos deals etc, a bikini statistic which is percentage of total price is used to lie about the level of indigenisation. For instance you import ARV for 100 and sell for 150 without any value addition then the Gross profit is 33% and the indigenisation is also 33%. But the % of Raw material indigenised is Zero. This type of mealy mouthed statistics are used to cheat and deceive.

member_22605 · Post by **member_22605** » 27 Jun 2012 16:35

The MBB team consisted of around 10-15 people only and it was more of a consultant and it was a joint venture in every sense. The first flight and initial tests were all carried out by HAL team(from what i was told, it was a sikh pilot and there was also a joke on the first flight story). MBB also gained from this JV and it was not all one way traffic. I can probably only say this much, maybe Hari sir can add if he wishes to. The ALH was a learning curve and thanks to that, today HAL is capable of designing, developing, testing and certifying helicopters all by itself in various weight categories. We now have a knowledge base in the country which never existed previously and there are also a few unique research projects which are being pursued by not many people in the world, so please try and get the full information and don't just depend on a few stories and sources, it is only after you close the loop that you get the entire picture
Cheers!

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 27 Jun 2012 16:39

Is IAF taking delivery of Global 5000 part of any known projects? ASTOR was offered in early 2009 after the Mumbai attacks but that is quite different from stating that IAF has been shopping around for an ASTOR type system.

Definitely need to keep lookout for any news on the matter.

vic · Post by **vic** » 27 Jun 2012 16:51

I am not depending on a story. I am referring to CAG report that the design, development and setting up the production line was the purview of MBB. ALH is just like Brahmos, Su-30MKI, AL-55 engine, Shakti engine type of programme where there is nothing HAL/indigenous about it.