LCA News and Discussions

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 03 Jun 2013 18:19

there are usually also very limited vacancies or slots for such advanced training

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 03 Jun 2013 22:47

khukri wrote: That's because you've been swallowing all the arguments that the HAL/DRDO apologists, including a delusional forum moderator (perhaps now ex?) have been making on this and other forums about how the LCA and other DRDO/HAL projects were within budget and not excessively delayed and were competitive performance wise.

Whenever an opinion to the contrary, no matter how tentatively, was expressed, he and others like him, took great pleasure in shouting the poster down and deriding his opinion, till many of us quit posting, kept our opinions to ourselves and merely "lurked" on the forum.
Looks like the worms are starting to crawl out from under the barrel?
Having said that - No doubt there are shining examples of success - LCH, Dhruv and others.

No offense but

Are the time slippage and price overrun only problem of DRDO?
Who else can do R&D on complex, long development time, investment intensive and limited number of examples projects?
Would you like to keep buying imported stuff, because local product are not upto mark during first try?
Which product is gold plated from the very start? Could you care to list such products?

I do agree that DRDO, HAL, ADE are not the best but this is what we have... and we have to accept that and stop this import circle.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Jun 2013 00:05

What we do get from local industry, does get fixed over a period of time, since the providers are local. Unless it was a reimport/reissue sort of thing (which does happen with DPSUs e.g. the TATRA gear) but local items developed in India, do get analyzed, and improvements made, if a MK1 which cleared trials ended up being suboptimal in extended field use.

In contrast, a lot of what we have purchased from abroad has either come in missing capabilities (and if we were lucky was fixed after we paid an arm and a leg and ordered more of the stuff as an incentive), or ended up being left to rot in its packaging because it didn't work. The stories are legion.

The worst aspect is that forces end up buying obsolete items as replacements for spares/munitions for already obsolete platforms. These are often obsolete themselves, pulled out of stocks of the suppliers, given a nice lick of paint and sent to India and turn out to be duds when trialled, leaving to one more case of expensive back & forth fracas. Many middlemen and suppliers have made a killing out of these deals.

Fact of the matter is the Indian services were addicted to foren partly deliberately, by successive GOIs led by a party which realized arms imports are a nice way of making money, so the Indian MIC was deliberately throttled from ever becoming properly self reliant. Only some folks with deep convictions have managed to hold off pressure, and still have national programs run. But even these are run in the usual penny wise, pound foolish fashion so that the import gravy train never truly ends.

Over time, significant sections of the services have become part of the system, in part because they think its ok and no harm done. Only of late, with each system costing an arm and a leg (Phalcons came in at $400 M, the dubious arm twisting employed by the Russians on T-90 modifications etc) is the realization sinking in that the days of candy store shopping are over. And that the strategic consequences are also dangerous, especially when India is still ostensibly non aligned.

Of late, there is yet another attempt to use the indigenization angle to bring in near total FDI (70% and above) into the country, ostensibly because foreign suppliers would otherwise never part with the technology. Somehow, that never stopped the Israelis or South Africa or Chinese from acquiring technology despite much harder conditions..

Besides which comparing the depth of the LCA program to the LCH or Dhruv is misplaced, and a bit amusing at that. Calling any forum moderator, delusional won't make up for that ..

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 04 Jun 2013 01:09

Tejas will not be ready for war before end-2015.

NEW DELHI: Defence minister A K Antony last week expressed the hope that the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft would finally get the final operational clearance (FOC) next year. But a hard-nosed ``internal assessment'' shows Antony's dream will be shattered.

The single-engine Tejas, already 30 years in the making, will not become fully combat-worthy anytime before end-2015. "The reality is that the around dozen Tejas prototypes are barely flying a couple of sorties a day. The initial operational clearance ( IOC)-II has again already been pushed to November this year from the earlier June-July deadline. It will take at least 18 months from IOC-II to FOC,'' said a source.

In fact, the foremost challenge before the new DRDO chief-cum-scientific advisor to the defence minister, missile scientist Avinash Chander, is to ensure the long-running, meandering Tejas project firmly heads towards completion because it's absolutely critical for India to have its own home-grown fighter.

The Tejas LCA project was first sanctioned in 1983 at a cost of Rs 560 crore to replace the ageing MiG-21s. The overall programme will now cost upwards of Rs 25,000 crore if the naval variant, trainer and the failed Kaveri engine are also taken into account.

It was in January 2011 that Tejas got IOC-I, which was initially heralded as the ``full and final IOC'' by the combine of DRDO, Aeronautical Development Agency and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd till better sense prevailed. The fighter can be certified as fully airworthy only after it passes the IOC-II stage.

But there are still ``several basic problems'' — leave alone complex issues — that continue to dog the fighter despite it having clocked over 2,000 flights. ``Tejas still cannot taxi back after a sortie since its brakes have to be first cooled with compressed air. It has major fuel gauge inaccuracies. Moreover, its radome (radar cover) is defective with large electromagnetic signal losses,'' said another source.

The light-weight Tejas will be ready to go to war only after the FOC, which will include integration of all weapons and other systems to ensure it can fire guns, rockets, laser-guided bombs and BVR (beyond visual range) missiles as well as undergo air-to-air refuelling.

IAF has earmarked the Sulur airbase in Tamil Nadu, near the Bengaluru HAL facilities where the fighter is being built, to house the initial Tejas squadron inducted in the IOC-II configuration to resolve ``the expected teething problems''.

The force has so far ordered 20 Tejas in IOC-II configuration, with the American GE-404 engines, and another 20 in FOC. As per current plans, IAF will order six Tejas Mark-II squadrons (16 to 18 jets each), with the more powerful GE F-414 engines, once the fighter is combat-ready.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Jun 2013 01:31

But there are still ``several basic problems'' — leave alone complex issues — that continue to dog the fighter despite it having clocked over 2,000 flights. ``Tejas still cannot taxi back after a sortie since its brakes have to be first cooled with compressed air. It has major fuel gauge inaccuracies. Moreover, its radome (radar cover) is defective with large electromagnetic signal losses,'' said another source.

Well, we need more info here.. and these are the only negatives in the above link... and DDM makes it appear, it is the whole dam a/c is gonner!

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 04 Jun 2013 01:41

But there are still ``several basic problems'' — leave alone complex issues — that continue to dog the fighter despite it having clocked over 2,000 flights. ``Tejas still cannot taxi back after a sortie since its brakes have to be first cooled with compressed air.

It seems to do that fine in this video of it being tested at Leh: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2Mf5dVXkOM

We've seen it taxi after landing in several other videos as well. Seems the "sources" reporting this are of the same variety that reported "torsion bar failure" in the Arjun tank.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Jun 2013 01:45

bingo! sorry about that nachiket! apologies. that turd rajat pandit is at all these. the fellow must be in good pay packet for writing these... meaning, if I were to report on such issues, I would go to obvious reasons behind it, and get the tech issues out with the plans ahead to fix them.. and positively write about FoC, and what things have been achieved by LCA.

these are moorkhs who do not fail themselves in this moharram dance.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jun 2013 01:48

LCA's Brake Management System seemed to have some problems. But that piece of news is crap. LCA was flying at AI'13 Did anybody see any compressed air trucks?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jun 2013 02:23

agupta wrote:While I have no direct info to support or contradict this article, please consider that the range of Combat specs (payload / runway length/temperatures ) is not the same as "AI - worthy" OR "sortie in Leh worthy"

Would you take Jaisalmer-bangalore-Leh as suitable range for combat specs?

1. As I wrote before, there were some issues with the reliability of the BMS. But to say that LCA can't taxi back is just prejudice.
2. It is true that ADA is trying to build a new radome for LCA with better EM characteristics.
3. I don't know about the fuel gauges though.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jun 2013 02:40

Even if true these seem to be minor hitches-fuel gauge,I'm sure the auto industry can fix that (Q,what about fuel gauges used on aircraft like the Jaguar,etc.? One reads how the Russians used to overcome such problems by using the same component across types )! Radome or radar problems? Anyway,as RK says,it is right now the best we have...somewhat like Brett the Hitman Hart,"the best there is, the best there was, the best there ever will be"! For India at least.We've trundled for so long on this stony and rocky path upwards that we have to stagger on until the very end.

The only factor of worry for the programme is that if these new deadlines are not met,there seems to be some sort of back up plan that the IAF/MOD have,which means "imports".This will affect the eventual numbers of the LCA built and we will be in an "Arjun" like situ. by 2015 as the retirement of the large number of MIG-21s will be in full swing.That's just around 500 days away,this year has sped away so fast that already half of it is over. I was clearing out some papers last night and found the invitation and map for the BR get-together at Shiv's place for Aero-India in 2007! My mind goes back to the very first air show talking to a yank watching the Sea Harrier and marvelling at it,and the two Russian attack helos."Time and tide wait for no man" and eventually it will not wait forever for the LCA.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Jun 2013 03:13

need to pick dileep ji's brain on radome losses. is it because of scattering or radome framework impedance matching?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jun 2013 03:43

Actually, I don't know if the problem is in controls or in mechanical/thermal. I heard Dr. Saraswat speak of "active" brake management system, which does not give us much either. LCA's brakes are already 'controlled' using multi-processor based logic. So what will the "active" part do? I can hazard a guess (in line with the payload, temperature etc.), but my guess is going to be as good as anybody else's.

aditya.agd · Post by **aditya.agd** » 04 Jun 2013 05:37

If the government stays out of LCA, LCA will fly.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 04 Jun 2013 06:01

aditya.agd wrote:If the government stays out of LCA, LCA will fly.

DRDO/ HAL are Government entities.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 04 Jun 2013 06:37

indranilroy wrote:LCA's Brake Management System seemed to have some problems. But that piece of news is crap. LCA was flying at AI'13 Did anybody see any compressed air trucks?

Really, what does one do with such reporters? So what does the LCA do after landing? Sit on the tarmac till another vehicle brings it compressed air?

It's hogwash. There might be some Brake Management System issues but the way it's described tells us a lot about the intent of writing such things-either that or the journo is a real dud.

saumitra_j · Post by **saumitra_j** » 04 Jun 2013 08:29

Kartik wrote:it's described tells us a lot about the intent of writing such things-either that or the journo is a real dud.

I believe it is another hit job by Rajat Pandit.. a well known dork. Repeat the same lies years and years on to make it the truth... typical Congi tactics at play here

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 04 Jun 2013 08:59

When i saw the headlines , it was like De ja Vu , little search in google and wallah , Rajat Pandit found recycling his own article

Tejas fighter jet won't be combat-ready before 2015

Rajat Pandit, TNN Jul 18, 2012,

LINK

member_23629 · Post by **member_23629** » 04 Jun 2013 10:34

^^^ This Pandit turd is batting for Goras against Indians. He has a long tradition of running down Indian efforts in manufacturing defence equipment. This kind of behaviour comes from greed and a weak sense of nationalism, which makes these jokers sitting ducks for other countries.

Corruption and bribery among journalists to do hit jobs have become big issues in India. We need a law against dishonest journalists to protect consumer interest (readers and viewers). Right now, these turds can right anything, take lifafas from anyone, serve bull crap to their consumers and shake their haunches and walk off.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 04 Jun 2013 11:57

Marten wrote:What does Rajat gain from Goebbelsian propagandu? What is the real angle? Just an import lobby lifafa or is there some other angle as well?

It is not just import lobby lifafa. Its other intent is to reduce and finally eliminate public support for indigenous defence equipment so that India is always dependent on foreign powers for arms.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 04 Jun 2013 13:32

but there is a real and present threat of "lobbying" from foreign companies that have a lot to lose if India becomes more independent and puts faith, money, time and effort into its indigenous products and solutions.

We already have a certain poster talking about the IAF having to start looking into imports instead of the LCA, if it misses any more deadlines..as if the imported aircraft will land the day after a contract (which itself will take a half decade to negotiate, if not more).

Sometimes, its just acute bias and prejudice. Our own forum presents adequate proof of that.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Jun 2013 14:11

The poster in Q,that is moi,can only read between the lines of the statements of the Def. Min. and the Air Chief,when they say that the deadline for IOC-2 is "final".I am not a lobbyist for firang imports,very happy with the manner in which the IN in particular has gone about creating a "builder's navy",where the designs are tailor made to our requirements.Past senior officers,including chiefs, have personally told me of the huge efforts that were made over the years by NHQ to attain the goal of self-reliance,but even here,the poor performance by our PSU shipyards has neccessitated imports like the Talwars and Scorpenes,not to mention most of the major weapon systems from DP guns,anti-ship missiles,naval SAMs and PDS,torpedoes and anti-sub weaponry,sensors,etc.Where are the forces going to get their hardware from if the PSUs do not deliver on time?

The problem is acute with the IAF which is in the coming years going to retire hundreds of MIG-21s.The LCA is nowhere in series production,which will only arrive by early 2015 if the IOC-2 keeps to the deadline.Of course the aircraft if imported will not be available on the shelf,but certainly any Western or Russian manufacturer ,if chosen to supply the IAF with aircraft will be able to deliver any orders far faster than HAL,who by their own admission,have yet to master the tech of establishing a production line for the LCA! The initial production number has officially been given as just 8,which in the fullness of time will rise to 18 per year. Let's also remember that the Mk-1 acquisition is a reluctant compromise by the IAF to accept an aircraft whose capabilities are below its requirements.It is the MK-2 version that the IAF really want and its anyone's guess as to when that bird will be in production.

Just as the decision to upgrade the MIG-21s to "Bison" std. was done earlier,excellent history in VAYU of how it was done,so also will the IAF have you look elsewhere if HAL/ADA fails to "meet the cut".There are no more legacy aircraft that can be upgraded.MIG-29s.M-2000s,MIG-27s and Jaguars are all in the process of being upgraded.The manner in which the programme is heading ,from available info,one fears that it will meet the same fate as the HF-24.This is NOT what we want to happen.The success of the LCA is vital to give confidence to our aerospace industry,but intense focus and effort is required from all stakeholders to achieve results.Therefore,the IAF have to plan for an alternative if the LCA fails to arrive.The alternative has to also be a cost-effective one.Thus far,we have been buying extra SU-30MKIs to keep our capabilities up to std.With the MMRCA and the FGFA due to arrive in the future,a smaller less expensive single-seater will be needed.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 04 Jun 2013 17:12

Philip wrote:
.....................Let's also remember that the Mk-1 acquisition is a reluctant compromise by the IAF to accept an aircraft whose capabilities are below its requirements.It is the MK-2 version that the IAF really want and its anyone's guess as to when that bird will be in production.......................

Philip, MK-2 is a must for IN not IAF. And no matter which version you will supply to user, there will always be a version MK-XX which they will ask for. Every designer follows an incremental approach to fixing problems.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 04 Jun 2013 17:21

I for once agree, IAF cannot wait forever for HAL to deliver. Every passing year makes the situation that much more difficult for IAF.

It is like, my wife has a ten year old car maintaining which has become difficult and I know it is not going to last long. I want to replace it with a launch promised by xyz car manufacturer. But the problem is, they keep on pushing the launch date further and further and further. They are not launching the toned down version as well.

What will I, or for that matter anyone do beyond a certain point? I think almost everyone on this forum will love to see Tejas in squadron service but there has to be a full stop somewhere.

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 04 Jun 2013 17:45

MMRCA they waited only 15 years. HAWK was 20 and more years?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 04 Jun 2013 18:30

and the hawk that was delivered bears fairly little resemblance to the hawk that was initially in scope!

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 04 Jun 2013 19:53

I hear they had no use for Su-30 until politicians forced it on them.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 04 Jun 2013 23:50

Better option would be to get 40 rafale from France instead of initial 18.and remaining manufactured in india,it will help in maintaining force levels and Dassault has indicated willingness for the same

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Jun 2013 01:02

narayana, narayana.. when has not France unwilling to sell off the shelf at chewing prices? do we all know the price of M2K upgrades?

Our fundamental flaws in drawing out programs are being exposed. LCA now has Rafale as direct competitor!?!?

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 05 Jun 2013 01:16

^^^ You should have waited a few posts soon FGFA,F-35 and F22 would have joined in as well

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 05 Jun 2013 02:32

SaiK wrote:LCA now has Rafale as direct competitor!?!?

You suggested "LCA++" as competitor to Rafale on another thread. So, what gives?

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... start=2600

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Jun 2013 09:05

Yes! and not Rafale as a replacement for LCA.

.

See.. your vote depends on which side you are speaking for. Firang or Desh. We all know, our billion planet is Firang Fetish.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 05 Jun 2013 09:35

flares are largely useless against modern sams.

that's because the seekers contain both an IR camera and heat-seeker module that jointly track the aircraft.

they are not confused by simple decoys like flares.

instead of releasing flares, how about small ball turret gattling guns/miniature missiles that seek & destroy the SAM in mid air.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Jun 2013 09:54

The range of most heat-seeking systems are pretty small? compared to range of combat-of the a/c. so, another possibility is EF2K's retractable decoys (say 10 meters is decent enough). It will also emit radiations mimicing the EF2K signature.

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 05 Jun 2013 10:04

SaiK wrote:Yes! and not Rafale as a replacement for LCA. .

See.. your vote depends on which side you are speaking for. Firang or Desh. We all know, our billion planet is Firang Fetish.

And how do we get rid of this foreign fetish? Even our training jets are imported! The whole IAF is an import

It is really a matter of aligning interests of EU and US block with Indian interests. How do we do that?
We should categorically reject all platforms from EU and US citing unaffordable costs, only import components. Otherwise we will buy Russian goodies as we can afford it ( which I believe to be true anyways).

They will support all our indigenous development efforts as they still earn some money instead of none if we go the Russian import way. It is easier to take the next indeginization step ...

Right now our strategy is flawed, we are pissing off the Russians and giving away hard earned forex to the euro-us lobby. The outcome will be that Russia will align with china-paki gang and we will be left a few white elephants like Rafale...not enough to defend against hundreds of chinese planes.

wilson_th · Post by **wilson_th** » 05 Jun 2013 21:35

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/l ... 775965.ece

Referring to the schedule for induction of LCA, he said: “It is a major challenge and we are gearing up for it. From today, we have to do 40 flights per month.”

we can compare against suryag's flight update if they are keeping up

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 05 Jun 2013 21:53

I actually did that the day this report came out. Actually, Anantha Krishnan M (Tarmak007) had a FB entry named "Tracking Tejas | A fighter stuck in muck!".

I really respect him for journalistic integrity and hence had written this as a reply:

I would be eagerly waiting for your report. Mr. Chander spoke of a requirement to undertake 40 test flights per months from today in order to reach IOC-2 and FOC on time. However, when I look at ADA's archive of test flights between 19-Dec 2012 and 31-May 2013, there has been 222 flights. This is already more than 40 flights per month. So how are you calling it stuck?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jun 2013 02:49

To my mind there are only two aircraft that will meet both cost and effectiveness if the LCA stalls further to meet the "light" fighter role.The Gripen and MIG-29/35.The cost of both would appear to be the least expensive.The Gripen would mean opening a new type to operate,but could be synergised with our own LCA's development-some commonality,so that the LCA benefits,that is if we look at it as complementing the LCA programme and NOT as a competitior.The Gripen viewed as a "friend". In fact,realistically,this is what the IAF/MOD should've done right from the start ,roping in the Sedes to assist the LCA,to replace the MIG-21s,but we all know that the ghost of Bofors continues to haunt us,or does it haunt someone in particular?!

The other realistic option is the MIG-29K/35,which is being inducted into the IN for use aboard at least three carriers.It is both cost-effective and could be seen as a smaller single-seat version of the SU-30MKI.The easiest aircraft to induct,which will require no major extra cost for training,etc,as the type is in service with the whole lot being upgraded.If the 35 is chosen,it brigns with it TVC and extra bells and whistles;the fact remains that both types will have an AESA radar.

As was mentioned above,the prohibitive cost of just upgrading the M-2000 fleet is shocking,almost 3 times that of upgrading the MIG-29s which are larger in number by at least a dozen aircraft too.Therefore,more MMRCAs will be prohibitively expensive.In a two-front war scenario,with China and Pak at our throats,numbers DO matter.The IAF must aim to have at least 900+ combat aircraft in its inventory,supported by another 150+ combat trainers which would also serve as close-support aircraft for ground forces.In addition we need a small qty. of COIN aircraft for our internal Naxal problems.

member_23360 · Post by **member_23360** » 06 Jun 2013 06:33

^^^ +1

srai · Post by **srai** » 06 Jun 2013 06:40

agupta wrote:...
So a clear signal needs to be sent - no more new aircraft development programs until HAL and ADA get together and get this past the finish line. ...

...

Given that the R&D of a "next-generation" combat aircraft can take anywhere from 20 to 30 years (simpler ones at least 10 years), you cannot stop new aircraft development activities. It has to be done in parallel. Even within a program, you will have many parallel R&D activities taking place on various LRUs, materials, etc. What you can instead mandate for is that the current project iteration needs to be adequately resourced to get it to the finish line. As individual groups finish their tasks, most of them will move on to next project and this may mean next iteration of a sub-component rather than a completely new project. It is possible that the next sub-component they work on could go on to be used in the "next-gen" aircraft as well.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Jun 2013 07:27

instead of saying no more new aircraft programs, we should say no more new aircraft platform development programs. we could use existing platform to enable tomorrows technologies.. and this is exactly the model followed by LM/Boeing et al.