LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 07 Nov 2014 05:48

Even before all of this HAL should treat itself as a proper vendor by having a separate biz dev division which works on different contract models and then MoD can decide whether to go with the contract or not

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Nov 2014 05:52

shiv wrote:
srai wrote:
If India wants to export its weapons in a fiercely competitive and established defence arena, it would need to provide its weapons on a soft credit type of scheme. Give them away for practically "free" to get a foot in the door. Fly-away cost is only around 20% of its 10-30 year lifecycle costs. There is a lot of money to be made through a product's maintenance support and keep your MIC humming along for decades supplying parts and doing repairs/upgrades.
One important aspect is to set up a mechanism to bribe military officers from foreign buyer nations.

I think the current crop of Indian "unofficial" middle agents are "world-class"

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 07 Nov 2014 06:42

Don't know where people get the idea that IAF only wants phoren planes and does not want desi planes. It is rooting for and depending heavily on the LCA2 to be the backbone of the IAF is it not? Does the LCA1 not have any problems? And if not, why are we even spending so much time, money and effort on LCA2?

member_28722 · Post by **member_28722** » 07 Nov 2014 06:49

^^^ I think the critics want to see a good 5 squadron commitment from IAF on LCA1 also

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Nov 2014 07:39

srai wrote:
I think the current crop of Indian "unofficial" middle agents are "world-class"

Big difference between receiver and giver.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 07 Nov 2014 07:48

Victor wrote:Don't know where people get the idea that IAF only wants phoren planes and does not want desi planes.

All the while when IAF rookies are being converted into human kebab and chutney by the ageing MiGs, and the IAF does not stop whinging about falling squadron levels any time, the logic of ordering a bare minimum of 40 Tejas does not make sense, especially when a squadron or even two of Mk1 can be squeezed out before the line is reconfigured for Mk2.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Nov 2014 08:20

kartik! doh! what was I thinking.. going GaN should dissipate more heat for its higher power usage. thanks for that article.

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Nov 2014 09:04

Victor wrote:Don't know where people get the idea that IAF only wants phoren planes and does not want desi planes. It is rooting for and depending heavily on the LCA2 to be the backbone of the IAF is it not? Does the LCA1 not have any problems? And if not, why are we even spending so much time, money and effort on LCA2?

Even for Mk.2, it is only planning on 4 squadrons (some 80-odd planes). You can't call that "the backbone" of the IAF.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Nov 2014 10:28

There are 4 "Qs" required to be a good arms exporter."Quality","Quantity","Quickly" and "Qost"! Unless the goods can compete with the best,can be made in large number in the required timeframe and at reasonable affordable cost,forget it. Otherwise we will be reduced to providing second-hand OPVs,patrol craft to Sri Lanka,the Seychelles,Mauuritius,etc.,and a few helicopters to Nepal,the Maldives,and a lonely ALH export to Ecuador.The best product that we have,have produced in large number, amazingly we hardly export ourselves...The DO-228! W are building evemn more specialised versions for the IN and we allowed RUAG to buy up the co. when HAL is thre sole manufacturer of the aircraft! As for LCA production,unless HAL can build a min. of 18/yr.forget about it.The IAF's need is at least 120-200,if HAL can build beyond 12/yr.Come 2025,we should actually be on the cusp of building the FGFA and AMCA prototypes.The Gripen is already there for those who want a light fighter.There are also several advanced jet trainers on the market/being developed which can double for the light attack role.There is going to be tough competition for it when it finally and fully arrives.One is sure that by 2025,SAAB will have another new Gripen variant,perhaps a "stealth Gripen" to be unveiled? One reason why I proposed a few years ago that with the available expertise achieved with the LCA programme,a stealthy single-engined version should be developed.a MK-3.

Will · Post by **Will** » 07 Nov 2014 13:16

Well rumours that the IAF is looking to private industry for an LCA production line for the MK-2. Having said that who would want the LCA Mk-1 when the IAF doesn't want it.

A bit of Stealth shaping for an MK-3 would be reasonable but cause of its size it cant be a full blown stealth aircraft. It wont be able to carry much in an internal weapons bay.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 07 Nov 2014 13:58

IAF has solely been focussed on Quality to compete with Chinese modernisation. But if they still can't see that they need Quantity, they're risking letting the nation down. No wonder IAF brass has put all its eggs in the Rafale basket. This is likely to leave them short on Quality (Stealth developments in north) and Quantity (2015-25).

One thing I detest is how reliant our thinking is on future development plans that no one seems to be working on. Deadlines are meaningless to the idiots involved who are only interested in keeping their gravy train going. The FGFA is not going to happen. Congressies were loathe to spend on defense and by agreeing with a mirage they've played IAF well.

Let us order 100 Mk-1 now and then worry about the rest all.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 07 Nov 2014 14:45

Victor wrote:It is rooting for and depending heavily on the LCA2 to be the backbone of the IAF is it not? Does the LCA1 not have any problems? And if not, why are we even spending so much time, money and effort on LCA2?

What are the chances that Mk2 will be having all the bells and no problems?
We already hear about MK3 with stealth features. What is stopping IAF from moving the goal posts?
What if tomorrow there is more powerful engine called 424 and IAF wants it?
Does all the planes in past and future fighters in IAF are problem free?

Each plane have some shortcoming and strengths. All air forces world over develop their strategies to cover shortcoming to save their backs and exploit the strengths to win the war. So IAF is not in a unique position. Check how Rafale/Eurofighter are improved in iterations, going with the IAF logic those planes still be Migrage+++/Jaguar+++ and 3 legged cheetas

Will · Post by **Will** » 07 Nov 2014 15:11

As has been said "Quantity has a Quality of its own. I cant believe a professional force like the IAF hasn't realised this. This harking for all gold standard equipment has to stop. If the LCA Mk1 is better than the Mig-21 then it should be good enough for the IAF.As things stand the Mk1 is good enough to take on most of the stuff that the Chinese and the Pakis can throw at us. In any future war the IAF is going to be caught with its pants down not cause of anything else but the total lack of numbers.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Nov 2014 16:21

shiv wrote:
srai wrote:
I think the current crop of Indian "unofficial" middle agents are "world-class"
Big difference between receiver and giver.

They solved that problem long back Sir: Duul citijenship.

One who gives also receives. So say the scriptures.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 08 Nov 2014 13:24

Anantha Krishnan M ‏@writetake 2h2 hours ago

#BreakingNews Tejas trainer #PV6 cleared for first flight. Completes HSTT. Likely to be flown by Tejas Sqn CO. More soon. @Oneindia

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 08 Nov 2014 14:30

Tarmak007
‪#‎BREAKINGNEWS‬ ‪#‎TejasTrainerPV6‬ completes successful first flight. Was piloted by Grp Capt Vivart Singh & Grp Capt Kabbadwal @Oneindia

‪#‎BREAKINGNEWS‬ ‪#‎TejasTrainerPV6‬ flew for approximate 30 minutes. Sources say PV6 is the final config of Tejas trainer protype. @Oneindia

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 08 Nov 2014 17:28

Will wrote:If the LCA Mk1 is better than the Mig-21 then it should be good enough for the IAF.

The MiG-21 is not the benchmark; the MiG-21 should have been retired 20 years ago. An aircraft inducted in 2015, should be able to serve for another 20-30 years; that is the benchmark.

Will wrote: As things stand the Mk1 is good enough to take on most of the stuff that the Chinese and the Pakis can throw at us. In any future war the IAF is going to be caught with its pants down not cause of anything else but the total lack of numbers.

Mk1 is better than PAF F-7, Mirage III/V and JF-17, but it is inferior to the F-16. Not sure what J-10/FC-20 is capable of.

Mk 1 is not in the same class as the Su 27/30 family of PLAAF inventory, of which they have several hundred.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 08 Nov 2014 17:43

Anantha Krishnan M ‏@writetake

#Tejas Trainer #PV6 during its first flight. @Oneindia report will go live soon.

Feast your eyes.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 08 Nov 2014 17:58

Eyes and heart smile because of such a wonderful sight. Remember how Sardar Patel, the govt machinery, kings and rulers of the Indian subcontinent, the people and so also freedom fighters from across the country made it possible to unite the diverse country which is united by different lifestyles of same culture.

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Nov 2014 19:31

kmkraoind wrote:
Anantha Krishnan M ‏@writetake

#Tejas Trainer #PV6 during its first flight. @Oneindia report will go live soon.
Feast your eyes.

A glorious sight indeed! I have not followed LCA in close to ten years but the recent pickup in activity have brought me back.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Nov 2014 19:34

Let us order 100 Mk-1 now and then worry about the rest all.

Problem is when will these additional 100 mk1 be delivered? Going by past record, before 2030 will be a miracle. So , in what way is additional mk1s going to stem the quantity problem at this stage especially since HAL should be ready to churn out mk2 well before that?. Ordering mk1s now makes sense only if mk2 is going to be delayed and considering HAL/ADA record so far regarding time lines, which it most likely will be, I don't disagree with the order of more mk1s perse, but at this point something else has to come in, probably another 40-60 mki or rafale.

Thakur_B wrote:
Victor wrote:Don't know where people get the idea that IAF only wants phoren planes and does not want desi planes.
All the while when IAF rookies are being converted into human kebab and chutney by the ageing MiGs, and the IAF does not stop whinging about falling squadron levels any time, the logic of ordering a bare minimum of 40 Tejas does not make sense, especially when a squadron or even two of Mk1 can be squeezed out before the line is reconfigured for Mk2.

But sirji, 40 units are precisely about 2 squads, let us see how long it takes HAL to squeeze those out. The order was placed about 10 years ago. Would IAF have mk1s in numbers by now and their pilots be saved from becoming "human kebabs" as you so eloquently put it, if IAF had ordered 100 more birds 5 years ago? IOW, it is doubtful if all this kebob business would have happened if Lca was being delivered anywhere close to timelines given to begin with. Of course ADA supporters will now say that this is is because IAF never really supported the program as they should have, all IAF fault wonlee, production agency is innocent as a newborn.

In any case, one feels that iaf will give additional orders for mk1 upon foc, which should have been eons ago.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Nov 2014 19:51

Folks keep using the mki as an example of how IAF is partial towards phoren maal pointing out that mki was not inducted with complete capability to begin with and additional capabilities were added in varying stages of service. What is conveniently forgotten/ignored is that the IAF had beaten to death a sqd worth fully developed su_27s before ordering the first 140 mki. Additional, marginal development of the mki happened in sqd service only after basic airframe was sufficiently familiarized with and used.

Lca procurement is not so different, problem is, the first sufficiently developed lca is still to be offered to the IAF. Once foc is reached more mk2 and possibly, even mk1s will be ordered.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Nov 2014 20:09

Marten wrote:CM, the issue is that with a logistical tail of 2 yrs, the order should have been expanded immediately after IOC2. That is pretty much most of my issue with MoD/IAF.

Perhaps, but IOC2 happened late last year, right? And foc was supposed to be within 12.months of ioc2 and ADA assured us that Foc variants are just some minor tweaks away, so perhaps IAF can be forgiven in hoping to get a foc specced bird within 12 months of that event.

Even so, if the order had been given early this year, when could we realistically expect the birds to arrive? Before MK2 is ready - expected in 2018? So why order mk1s concurrently with mk2? In any case , a standing order of 40 mk1s is already there and so is a promise of 100+ mk2s.

But like said earlier, I think once foc is reached, iaf will probably give a bigger order for mk1s, simply because we all know that mk2 is going to be nowhere near ready by 2018

* changes made to post as timeline was not.accurate on my part

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Nov 2014 20:12

If we are serious in concurrent engineering for future, many of the lego plugin components should be tested using LCA TD platform. This is how the khans did it using their F16 platform. A dual engine LCA is much need of the hour plan for future MCA concepts.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 Nov 2014 20:15

FOC wiil obviously be delayed as the inflight refuelling probe etc itself took a lot of time to come.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Nov 2014 20:25

one should not ignore that TD -> PV -> LSP -> P had 4 different spec changes. that is crap for engineering!
spec change should not induce new scope creep. should come out with different model/variant.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Nov 2014 20:30

Saiji, can you please list what these changes were at each stage. Were they justified or was iaf simply increasing scope for sake of it?

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 08 Nov 2014 20:45

New images are also coming in from ADA/HAL.

Can someone please post.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 Nov 2014 21:03

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 08 Nov 2014 21:10

Cain Marko wrote: Problem is when will these additional 100 mk1 be delivered? ......... Ordering mk1s now makes sense only if mk2 is going to be delayed

This is like saying, that I am a beginner to running and I don't want to prepare for the half marathon because I have my sights set on the full marathon. If I don't be successful in the first full marathon that I run, THEN I will prepare for the half marathon.

The capability development is quite linear. The production engineering that is learnt while making 100 Mk1s which can easily be repurposed to trainers in the future, will be very useful in Mk2.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 08 Nov 2014 21:38

Changes:
1. Radar.
2. New pitot tube on the Nose landing gear door
3. New clamshell parachute cap which stays on the fuselage rather than the parachute.

nash · Post by **nash** » 08 Nov 2014 21:41

Tejas Trainer PV 6 completes first flight successfully

http://news.oneindia.in/india/tejas-tra ... 55940.html

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 08 Nov 2014 21:41

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 08 Nov 2014 22:15

With the trainer flying the Squadron should start getting ready - I mean flying wise. Fantastic.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Nov 2014 22:19

mahadevbhu wrote:This is like saying, that I am a beginner to running and I don't want to prepare for the half marathon because I have my sights set on the full marathon. If I don't be successful in the first full marathon that I run, THEN I will prepare for the half marathon.

red herring anyone? I''ll take the bait - Obvious Difference being that I am already running the half marathon because 40.mk1 are on order.

The capability development is quite linear. The production engineering that is learnt while making 100 Mk1s which can easily be repurposed to trainers in the future, will be very useful in Mk2.

[/quote]

No , it is more akin to let us relearn what we have already learned. Can't production engineering be learned while building 40 birds? What you are esentially saying is create a masivive production assembly only to set up an entirely new one again. Waste of resources.

As far as an AJT goes, does the IAF see a need for more apart from the HAWKS? or would you just impose an additional 140 units on them?

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 08 Nov 2014 22:43

very silly Q, PV5 vs PV6 - what I understand is the PV5 was never flown much so how can PV6 be ready to enter squadron service with all the goodies? how were the features like seamless cockpit control exchange tested(just an example)

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 08 Nov 2014 22:44

Cain Marko wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:This is like saying, that I am a beginner to running and I don't want to prepare for the half marathon because I have my sights set on the full marathon. If I don't be successful in the first full marathon that I run, THEN I will prepare for the half marathon.

red herring anyone? I''ll take the bait - Obvious Difference being that I am already running the half marathon because 40.mk1 are on order.

Your Hawks point is taken. The LCA Tejas is more of an operational fighter than the Hawks, so re-purposing them either ways is easier in case of war.

No. Making 40 is NOT the same as making 120. Making 8 / year is NOT the same as making 15 /year, just with more resources. Ramping up is something to be learnt.

Our mil-ind complex is NOT a past master at production. Making en masse is very much a desirable and doable goal which will teach us a lot. The IAF risks doing a Marut again on HAL with their demand for the Mk2 and the throttling of the Mk1 quantities.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 08 Nov 2014 22:45

CM sahab,

Wrong analogies and counter points aside, just answer this question. What is so wrong with the Mk1 that we can't have 4 squadrons of Mk1? Basically, I have the wherewithal to build 16 mk1 in the next 2 years and 16 more annually from then on. Why shouldn't I use this capability till Mk2s can be serially produced at the same rate?

By the way, this is how the first 50 Su-30 MKIs were accepted by IAF.

After two years of evaluation and negotiations, India signed a US$1.462 billion deal with the Sukhoi Corporation on 30 November 1996 for the delivery of 50 Su-30MKI aircraft in five batches. The first batch were eight Su-30MKs, the basic version of Su-30. The second batch were to be 10 Su-30Ks with French and Israeli avionics. The third batch were to be 10 Su-30MKIs featuring canard foreplanes. The fourth batch of 12 Su-30MKIs and final batch of 10 Su-30MKIs aircraft all were to have the AL-31FP turbofans. These 50 aircraft were made by Sukhoi in Russia.

So, IAF signed a deal 3 years before it got the first Su-30MKI variant. It accepted 30 articles which were not even aircraft which would enter squadron service!

Actually if you ask me, IAF was not wrong there. This is what an air force should do for a fighter it is going to adopt. The same story for Jaguar (which was changed from a trainer to a strike aircraft). The same should have happened with LCA also. Alas, this is not is happening. From day 1 it has to be able to enter squadron service! From then on, IAF will start their evaluations, and if found fit, then orders will follow!!! How is this financially sustainable?

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 08 Nov 2014 22:58

Some how I feel as long as imports are allowed MOD with the exception of Navy are not showing any interest in Local systems. The fact seems to be this is more of the problem because of MOD than Armed Forces. If MOD is forced by political leadership then All gora maaal love will vanish from every where.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Nov 2014 23:07

CM saab, absolutely IAF as the solo user is justified to ask even stealth features on LCA. what I am pointing is DRDO project mgmt screw ups. of course there are reasons for many and for them to do staged plans.. but what I am pointing is this. every stage they deliver the product, the product has usage value more than delivery all in one basket, and we still reaching space to match next set of requirements to be packed into the same original variant/block.

bottom: go block mode production plan.. and upgrade earlier blocks to newer blocks. that way, we have both developer and consumer satisfied.