LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Nov 2013 10:07

There was a discussion on a different thread WRT, the suitability of the BRD for the production of aircraft's.

I have a feeling that if the HAL is unable to produce the required numbers of Tejas aircraft's per year, then one of the BRD's could be restructured as a second production line for the plane.

However, a decision to do so must be taken soon.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Nov 2013 10:34

^ BRDs suffer from same issues as HAL i.e. both are essentially under the government. HALs inability to produce more number of AC is primarily because of it's inexperience with mass production. Setting up 2 or more assembly lines which can run in parallel does not just need money , it needs vision, planning, man power and obviously increase in production or processing of raw materials themselves .

BRDs were never instituted to mass produce AC in the first place , HAL was when latter itself cannot step up to the plate it is wishful to think about former taking up that role.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Nov 2013 10:46

Let the baby production walk to make 15 per year... then we can apply all engineering to make it a grand number.. smaller scale is better, because i sincerely feel IAF will change specs.

So, lets get them engaged ! get IAF commit as stakeholder for a spec that is guaranteed not to change for a model, with a guaranteed buy per model/block agreement. say, 65 planes a must for each block. Upgrade industries can make money in the future.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 11 Nov 2013 18:19

Pratyush wrote: I have a feeling that if the HAL is unable to produce the required numbers of Tejas aircraft's per year, then one of the BRD's could be restructured as a second production line for the plane.

Why presume that HAL will fail to produce the required number? Yes, production will take time to ramp up and yes there may be delays. But are there any valid reasons as to why HAL cannot or is not likely to be able to do it? I ask because I have noticed another member repeat this ad nauseam while pushing the Rafael, like there is a Laxman Rekha which HAL cannot breach.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 11 Nov 2013 18:27

if you speak to service people, they will tell you that desi defence factories struggle to achieve reliable quality production levels. that is more important than just numbers

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Nov 2013 18:40

Well, HAL is yet to achieve required production level per annum for its smash-hit product - ALH Dhruv - when the production book is full with orders. And which it has been producing since 2003. So, the jury is still out on HAL mastering the manufacturing process and production rate for something as complicated as LCA.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Nov 2013 18:41

Lalprof that is by and large true for stuff made under license or ToT ; for instance OFB to this day cannot even make those damn carbines to a minimum standard, the magazine just falls out during firing. However take the case of the Shivalik class and everyone who serves on that ship or even the Delhi class only has good things to say. Shivalik class has by far the best MMI among all the IN ships, even better than the Talwar class.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 11 Nov 2013 20:03

There is no use of manufacturing 50-60 LCA untill we get our own engine on it.

The reasons are below

1. IAF wants LCA no dought but with Rafale , su30 coming in near 2016-2018 + FGFA(PAK-FA) near 2020 we hardly need 50+ LCA/year (considering management of fighters ,pilots,airfields , support etc).

50 LCA/year = 50(2016)+50(2017)+50(2018)=150 LCA

2. Just having a big air force doesn't actually mean that we are a strong one (Saudi Arabia example ,they have almost
everything).

3. Putting Kaveri or some version of kaveri near 2017-18 means that we can now export our own indigenous fighter which we are in control of , so we can actually export LCA (mk1 or mk2 ) which will not only reduce cost but put the manufacturer to keep a complete road map of LCA . Say will get reduced RCS coating around 2018, get higher thrust engine 2020, get 5 gen upgrades 2022 etc.

4. Now we will know that LCA will be there till 2040+ meaning that we can upgrade production line for not only for IAF but friendly countries as well & we can manufacture say 50+/year from 2018-2020 onwards (depending on export success).

5. finally LCA a successful project, bharat making money ,reducing deficit , Strong Air force,no restrictions by anyone , 2020+ Bharat a super power .

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Nov 2013 21:41

Philip, The Saint might be forced by other deadlines like next year.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Nov 2013 21:56

Yes.The "usual suspects" are hungry and the cafe is closing....for good soon!

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 11 Nov 2013 22:18

NP-1 First Flight Video (sincere apologies if posted earlier)

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Nov 2013 01:15

I have a problem with how wishful the opinions are here. We are so painted in "nationalistic pride" that we don't see the obvious or we purposefully over see it.

I am not making an example, but on one hand we have:

Next challenge is to mass-produce LCA. We all know PSU HAL is hard-pressed to build LCA in numbers. HAL should sub-contract almost all parts to private sector and focus only on assembly and final testing. This is the only way to meet schedules.

India must seriously go for building 50-60 LCAs per year. It is quite doable, if the country is serious.

I hate the lethargy of DPSUs. But this 50-60 aircraft per year is nothing more than a joke to me. If you want to see a plane roll out of a newly built assembly line in 2020, you must be building the assembly line today. And you must place the orders for parts of the planes in bulk, latest by 2016. Doesn't matter if it is done by private or public. Doesn't matter whether national will is present or not. Where will you get the 2nd tier, 3rd tier companies which serially produce these parts. It is non-existent today. Please listen to the talks in AI'13.

And LCA is my dearest plane by miles, but it is still an unproven aircraft with respect to squadron service. The flying characteristics and avionics is only one part of an operational plane. It will definitely succeed, but it will definitely need modifications too. Designs will get validated, rejected and modified. At least let the IAF fly it for a couple of years before deciding to buy the plane in 100s !!! Allow ADA/HAL/DRDO/private partners learn a little before setting up 2 assembly lines!!!

And on the other hand.

There is no use of manufacturing 50-60 LCA untill we get our own engine on it.

The reasons are below

<SNIP>

3. Putting Kaveri or some version of kaveri near 2017-18 means that we can now export our own indigenous fighter which we are in control of , so we can actually export LCA (mk1 or mk2 ) which will not only reduce cost but put the manufacturer to keep a complete road map of LCA . Say will get reduced RCS coating around 2018, get higher thrust engine 2020, get 5 gen upgrades 2022 etc.

Sorry. But you are dreaming way too much. Currently there are two indigenous efforts on a Kaveri class engine.
1. Achieve the designed goals of Kaveri. Even if it is done, it will never be enough for any version of LCA other than the trainer perhaps. And you think we will get this engine, certify it on an LCA, productionize and export it by 2017-2018. Seriously?
2. There is a new effort which has just started on a 120 kN engine. I have to dig up the tender for the co design and development of it. Many stars have to line up for LCA to be certified with that engine before 2030. It is not a matter of whether India can do it. That is the time required for an ab-initio engine design to get certified on an aircraft. So it will be great for a midlife upgrade of LCA, but certainly not as the engine on newly builts.

If you want LCA to succeed domestically and internationally, let it fly as much as you can. Don't make it contingent to any Indian engine development effort right now.

I am sorry but the level of discussion in some threads including this one has been very poor. In the last 3 pages of this thread, 2 pages are utter nonsense. I think it is time that posters read, think and then ink, rather than pen down whatever they feel is possible.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Nov 2013 04:04

Producing 32 (or more - I think 32 is a good number) per year does not have be "right now".

I feel that the main problems is going to be:

* As has been mentioned - "debug" the LCA. This can be done with the current rate of somewhere between 4-8 per year. I would think they should have some 4-6 by end of 2014 and some 12 (total) by end of 2015. When we consider the possibility of incremental improvements the 12 (all MK1s), over two years, should provide adequate evaluation + feedback + modifications cycle. So, I would expect that by end of 2015 India should have a very good idea about which MK to order in bulk. By then they should be able to ramp up to 16 and by 2018ish to 32 per year.

I am inclined to be happy with the MK1, but in which ever combination I feel India should order (or be prepared to order) at least 150 LCAs and perhaps as many as 200. If there is a good export market then move over to the AMCA and export whatever LCAs they can.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 12 Nov 2013 06:06

@Indranilroy ^^^: "I have a problem with how wishful the opinions are here. We are so painted in "nationalistic pride" that we don't see the obvious or we purposefully over see it. "

+1. It's bordering on the delusional.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Nov 2013 10:08

http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=20544
Ajai Shukla: Of whipping boys and holy cows

ouch!

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 12 Nov 2013 13:06

rohitvats wrote:Well, HAL is yet to achieve required production level per annum for its smash-hit product - ALH Dhruv - when the production book is full with orders. And which it has been producing since 2003. So, the jury is still out on HAL mastering the manufacturing process and production rate for something as complicated as LCA.

Jury will remain out I think

I'm not sure how long our country can withstand the situation of having only HAL as the manufacturer/assembler of fighter/trainer aircraft and have no other alternative in sight.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 12 Nov 2013 14:38

^^^

Not for a long time I hope. We are already seeing clearances for Pvt players to set up, assembly plants, for JV machines. It is only a matter of time before, the PVT, players start the push for R&D operation as well.

Once that starts to take place, it is just a matter of time, that, full scape development and production of aircraft's moves to PVt sector.

To the argument of Aviation being a strategic sector. The answer ought to be, if its OK to buy from foreign pvt players, it is ok to buy from domestic pvt players.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Nov 2013 15:43

The 26% limit on FDI in Defense Sector seems to be a ploy to ensure the monopoly enjoyed by DPSU and OFB stays a bit longer.

I mean, ask yourself this - In a highly capital intensive business with relatively long gestation period like aviation or other weapon systems where a large part of the cost resides in the sunk R&D cost, what will a newbie Indian partner bring for 74% share? Land value? CAPEX towards manufacturing plant and share (pro-rata or higher) of OPEX? And how deep a pocket is required to sustain production run to break even? I'm expecting 8-10 years minimum.

As it is, what would be share of CAPEX and OPEX towards manufacturing of the weapon system in the overall item price?

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 12 Nov 2013 16:46

can any one share the major checklist for IOC - 2 and FOC

So for IOC 2 do we have the following completed

wake penetration trials -
Lightning Test -
Electronic warfare integrated
AoA envelope - target ?

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 12 Nov 2013 17:36

Lightning test is not there for IOC-2 I think. For this individual components have to be first qualified and then the whole aircraft and that will take time.

member_27847 · Post by **member_27847** » 13 Nov 2013 10:41

Indranil,

If LCA cannot be produced in large numbers (whatever be the reasons), then GOI should just accept that it cannot defend the nation.

How can Rafale or any other imported fighter be acquired in large enough numbers to defend huge areas of India that are currently poorly defended against air attacks?

What do you have to protect Lucknow, Varanasi, Patna and Kolkata from air attacks from China?

Only Delhi is well protected. But is India just Delhi???

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 13 Nov 2013 11:54

Garg wrote:Indranil,

If LCA cannot be produced in large numbers (whatever be the reasons), then GOI should just accept that it cannot defend the nation.

How can Rafale or any other imported fighter be acquired in large enough numbers to defend huge areas of India that are currently poorly defended against air attacks?

What do you have to protect Lucknow, Varanasi, Patna and Kolkata from air attacks from China?

Only Delhi is well protected. But is India just Delhi???

1. Those number of squadrons that IAF has drawn up is based on a 2-front war. And it is to defend the entire territory of India.

2. I am not answerable for GOI, but it doesn't matter which government comes into being. Even is the best possible govt. comes into being in 2014, it is just not possible to build 50-60 LCAs per year anywhere before 2020-2022. Unfortunately, that is the nature of aircraft industry. Some parts are incredibly complex and the logistic chains run long, very long. Even the most well oiled assembly lines have to place the orders for certain parts 3 years in advance (even when most of these complex parts come from the most well established OEMs). India does not have 1 assembler or OEM anywhere near the caliber that is required to reach those levels of efficiency (yes, gulp your pride, this is the truth). If you listen to what the HAL chief spoke in AI'13, he cannot retain even the ones that he originally had a few years back. This is our current state of aeronautical industry.

If you want to build a modern assembly line too, you would need 3-5 years (unless you can buy one lock-stock-and-barrel from somewhere). Then, you have to find and train men who can work at these assembly lines. The qualifications required are not very high, but the level of training required is very very high. And somehow we have to drive out the carelessness in these men so that they don't leave behind screw drivers in the aircraft engines. My primary anger with HAL/ADA is that they know this. And yet they were sleeping till last year! You can blame IAF/MoD as much as you want, but to give a clean chit to HAL/ADA you have to be blind.

Past GoIs deserve a lot of blame for the state of affairs today. But if are expecting magic to happen from 2014, I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 13 Nov 2013 12:14

Garg wrote:Indranil,

If LCA cannot be produced in large numbers (whatever be the reasons), then GOI should just accept that it cannot defend the nation.

How can Rafale or any other imported fighter be acquired in large enough numbers to defend huge areas of India that are currently poorly defended against air attacks?

What do you have to protect Lucknow, Varanasi, Patna and Kolkata from air attacks from China?

Only Delhi is well protected. But is India just Delhi???

Garg sahab, it is not just a numbers game. There is a cost for everything. A production line for aircraft and that to a front line fighter is not easy to make. Most of the countries in the game have been at it for years! There is a host of parts which come from different suppliers. I remember seeing an image which had the suppliers logos for the LCA. Some parts are custom made and have long lead times.
Add to that the fact that most of the skin of the a/c is composite, we need autoclaves and other material.
All this investment takes time. There are certifications, recertifications for safety and other things.

To answer your second question - OT for this thread - Please check if there is any airbase to protect Mumbai (our financial capital IIRC) from attacks. The answer is a resounding 'NO'? or rather it is probably better protected than even Delhi? Pune AFB housing 2 squadrons of the Rambhas is less than 15 minutes flying time away. Add to that other airbases in Gujarat and the Naval Base in Goa, you have a three layer grid for Mumbai and Pune.

Similarly for the cities you mention there are other AFB's which provide enough cover for these cities. AFB Tezpur, Chabua, etc to name a few.

Otherwise going by your logic every city will need its own Airbase and Air defence mechanism - how many squadrons of A/c and regiments of missiles will you have to raise. Please do the math.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 13 Nov 2013 14:22

LCA production line being set up at a new facility has production capacity of 16/year which will be expanded to 20/year of which 14/year will go to IAF and rest 6/year will go to IN.

Total planned acquisition for IAF per year for next decade will be 14 LCA+20 Rafales +16 Su30/FGFA=50 fighters per year.

As per reports they are going for straight 16/year LCA production rate so that 40 LCAMK1+8NLCA=48 nos are produced by 2016 and production of LCA MK2 starts.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 13 Nov 2013 14:37

Sorry. But you are dreaming way too much. Currently there are two indigenous efforts on a Kaveri class engine.
1. Achieve the designed goals of Kaveri. Even if it is done, it will never be enough for any version of LCA other than the trainer perhaps. And you think we will get this engine, certify it on an LCA, productionize and export it by 2017-2018. Seriously?
2. There is a new effort which has just started on a 120 kN engine. I have to dig up the tender for the co design and development of it. Many stars have to line up for LCA to be certified with that engine before 2030. It is not a matter of whether India can do it. That is the time required for an ab-initio engine design to get certified on an aircraft. So it will be great for a midlife upgrade of LCA, but certainly not as the engine on newly builts.

If you want LCA to succeed domestically and internationally, let it fly as much as you can. Don't make it contingent to any Indian engine development effort right now.

I am sorry but the level of discussion in some threads including this one has been very poor. In the last 3 pages of this thread, 2 pages are utter nonsense. I think it is time that posters read, think and then ink, rather than pen down whatever they feel is possible.

Please don't get in the time line of 2016-18 & say that it is utter nonsense , if scientist from any institute say drdo or even dod from us were able to stick to timeline the world would have been different.

2016-18 is maybe the time when we actually get a stable kaveri onto LCA & start the talk of export
the core kabini is close to what we need & our only problem is weight so it is not unbelievable if we get it right in next few years

also as the level of discussion were poor , let me tell you a story of a idea that are used by Aircraft careers all over the world which was started as a poor discussion .

when USN started designing its new AC they had a problem of space as the length of AC couldn't be increased without major efforts , the secretory of this designer used her lipstick to dray two parallel line's across the diagram of AC showing that if a tilted launch & recovery platform is used the AC will have more space & that's how all the AC have angled platform & not a straight one.

all ideas & discussion may seem stupid at one point but they may workout some how so we can just hope for the best & pray that LCA is not only a success for our Air force but will help us in making new & improved relationship with friendly countries.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 13 Nov 2013 14:55

^^^

OT for this thread

Minor correction, It was the RN that was responsible for the Angled deck and mirror landing site development. Also, the secretary was acting upon the instructions of a RN commodore in a demonstration to one of the admirals. WRT, the merits of the system.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 13 Nov 2013 16:20

tushar_m wrote: Please don't get in the time line of 2016-18 & say that it is utter nonsense , if scientist from any institute say drdo or even dod from us were able to stick to timeline the world would have been different.

2016-18 is maybe the time when we actually get a stable kaveri onto LCA & start the talk of export
the core kabini is close to what we need & our only problem is weight so it is not unbelievable if we get it right in next few years

Boss,
Please point out any of my arguments where I have said it is not possible ONLY for the SDRE scientists?! I have said it is not possible for anybody in the industry, even those who have decades of experience. I believe I have stated facts, not opinions or judgments. On top of these realities about the aviation industry in general, our situation in India is much worse. It is a bitter pill to swallow. But the faster we swallow it, the faster we would be able to rectify our expectations and may be work towards exceeding them. Anyways that's beside the point.

tushar_m wrote:
also as the level of discussion were poor , let me tell you a story of a idea that are used by Aircraft careers all over the world which was started as a poor discussion .

when USN started designing its new AC they had a problem of space as the length of AC couldn't be increased without major efforts , the secretory of this designer used her lipstick to dray two parallel line's across the diagram of AC showing that if a tilted launch & recovery platform is used the AC will have more space & that's how all the AC have angled platform & not a straight one.

all ideas & discussion may seem stupid at one point but they may workout some how so we can just hope for the best & pray that LCA is not only a success for our Air force but will help us in making new & improved relationship with friendly countries.

Unfortunately, the anecdote you have quoted here is wrong on two counts.
Firstly, it is factually wrong. The lipstick marks were not to show that the length of an angled ship deck would be larger. That is class VI geometry. What the commander was demonstrating is now called the "Mirror sight" concept which was combined with an angled deck to aide pilots to have a steady, constant throttle, straight descending approach right down to the deck. And the secretary had no part to play in this except lending her lipstick and mirror bag.

Secondly, there is huge difference between that example based on meritorious understanding of the problem and the physics behind the solution. What is going on here is you provide an opinion. I provide a counter opinion and so on. Unfortunately, neither the opinion nor the counter opinion stand the test of even slight effort to try to understand the problems.

And now I have made 2 useless posts myself

. It will be unfair if I don't heed your opinion, but this is the last on this from me.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 13 Nov 2013 16:43

your points are right , but i am not going to put a pessimist view in a forum just to criticize my Indian scientist's .

just expecting a ICBM & nuclear sub made our way into the club in just 67+ years of independence

(4+ wars ,population , internal problems,restrictions & 60 years of congress rule including)

there are view's you provide & there are views i provide ,we may not agree with each other & its natural.

no disrespect to anyone my intentions were not wrong.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 13 Nov 2013 17:06

LCA back at Jamnagar for weapons trials

After the Tejas LSP-7 successfully completed several weapons release test points at Jamnagar in July this year, three more limited series airframes (LSP-3, LSP-5 and LSP-8) are now in Jamnagar to bolster the gains made, and notch up more test points necessary for initial operational clearance of the LCA Tejas Mk.1 in December. The three platforms will undertake a slew of weapons release manoeuvres including releasing bombs and firing the Vympel R-73 missile, the only missile so far deployed on the Tejas.

The IAF has indicated the team testing Tejas is looking to achieve IOC-2 before Christmas, anywhere between Dec 19-24. However, there remain several test points still to clear, placing a great deal of pressure on the team. On November 6, Defence Minister AK Antony ordered the DRDO to ensure that Initial Operational Clearance and Final Operational Clearance of the LCA were completed on schedule, with both the MoD and IAF making it fully clear that no further extensions will be granted to the programme.

In August, Antony told Parliament, “Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) have been asked to strictly adhere to the planned schedules for Initial Operational Clearance (IOC-2) by end of 2013 and Final Operational Clearance (FOC) by end of 2014 to ensure timely induction of Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) in the Indian Air Force (IAF). Tejas is likely to be inducted in the Indian Air Force soon after the Initial Operational Clearance (IOC-2).” DRDO chief Avinash Chander has indicated earlier this year that the first three-four full rate production Tejas fighters would roll out of the HAL facility in December this year, the first of 40 ordered by the IAF.

source: http://idrw.org/?p=29401

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 13 Nov 2013 17:56

Hmm. So the Avinash Chander boast of being ready for IOC-2 in September itself was, to put it delicately, untrue. So let us see if they meet the Dec deadline or if there will be an IOC-3.

The second thing I didn't quite understand is the Saint insisting that there will be no more extensions. So if they fail to meet the Dec deadline inspite of their best efforts, what is the Saint going to do. Drop the program?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Nov 2013 19:15

I think the IOC-2 was moved to Dec (want to say say end of Dec).

There is a cost for everything. A production line for aircraft and that to a front line fighter is not easy to make. Most of the countries in the game have been at it for years! There is a host of parts which come from different suppliers. I remember seeing an image which had the suppliers logos for the LCA. Some parts are custom made and have long lead times.
Add to that the fact that most of the skin of the a/c is composite, we need autoclaves and other material.
All this investment takes time. There are certifications, recertifications for safety and other things.

These are all project management related topics, supply chain, procurement, etc. IF they are serious they can tackle them all. There are plenty of NRIs doing such work abroad, so .............................

Well, HAL is yet to achieve required production level per annum for its smash-hit product - ALH Dhruv - when the production book is full with orders. And which it has been producing since 2003. So, the jury is still out on HAL mastering the manufacturing process and production rate for something as complicated as LCA.

That certainly is a problem. Do we KNOW that "mastering the manufacturing process" is the culprit? IF it is then promises/expectations will remain promises/expectations. I mean quoting Chander will have no meaning.

What is up with the Saint? Why in 2013 did he (attempt?) to put his foot down? With this cat being let out of the bag, something seems to be out of sync.

Nonetheless, all these issues are fixable - that too in relatively short time. The question is do *they* want to fix them in a relatively short time.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 13 Nov 2013 19:48

the only thing they can do is apply financial penalties

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Nov 2013 19:56

All entities being government, who penalizes whom? If I understand you, it seems to me that it is an accounting gimmick.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 13 Nov 2013 20:05

depends on your view - ultimately someone ends up with a cashflow gap and feels the pain
if not then there was no point in setting ultimatums

kvraghavaiah · Post by **kvraghavaiah** » 13 Nov 2013 20:09

Has R-73 missile been fired for IOC-2? I saw pictures posted in Facebook by Tarmak and Airforce today, of LCA firing R-73. Not sure if they mean the very first R-73 missile fire or the one planned for now.

Ashok Sarraff · Post by **Ashok Sarraff** » 13 Nov 2013 20:26

'Negative' motivation (e.g., no pension, no bonuses etc.) should not be used in projects and institutions of national importance. Doing so would be self-defeating if not catastrophic in the long-run.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 13 Nov 2013 20:35

finish on time and get a ride on a tejas (+ve and -ve motivation! i.e. your life is on the line if you mess it up!)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Nov 2013 20:58

I am not sure how anyone can place deadlines on projects like the LCA. Certainly there is a need for it become a mature weapon system, yet there is bound to be an element of a technology-demonstrator to some extent. Perhaps expecting a minimum platform should be the immediate goal, then build out to whatever it can handle. But, to expect the world in the very first effort is bit too much IMHO. And, then to declare it can be done is even a greater head-scratching event.

Dunno. But, that is on the technical side - the slip, sliding away phase. Manufacturing, etc are controllable IMHO - some gyrations should be expected.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 13 Nov 2013 21:22

and that has been the problem all along - from the earliest days, the targets were all set at "world class" and then as the definition of that shifted over time, the goal posts kept on moving without any attempt to touch the ball

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 13 Nov 2013 23:01

kvraghavaiah wrote:Has R-73 missile been fired for IOC-2? I saw pictures posted in Facebook by Tarmak and Airforce today, of LCA firing R-73. Not sure if they mean the very first R-73 missile fire or the one planned for now.

The R - 73 has been fired before from LSP-3. See below:

After the Tejas LSP-7 successfully completed several weapons release test points at Jamnagar in July this year, three more limited series airframes (LSP-3, LSP-5 and LSP-8) are now in Jamnagar to bolster the gains made, and notch up more test points necessary for initial operational clearance of the LCA Tejas Mk.1 in December. The three platforms will undertake a slew of weapons release manoeuvres including releasing bombs and firing the Vympel R-73 missile, the only missile so far deployed on the Tejas.