LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 08 Jun 2015 21:34

Thanks (for being patient) saar. Will go thru them.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Jun 2015 21:38

ramana wrote:The LCA quartz radome is it made from composites?
I get the need for quartz for R/F transparency requirements.

How was the local radome made?

We now know the local radome was from ASL (Advanced Systems Lab). ASL continues to be radome specialist, but the real radome for fighters specialists are here:
http://www.nal.res.in/pdf/Computational ... ratory.pdf

In short, they got the new "hybrid MMR" started running tests on it, realized radome had issues, went to Cobham thinking it would be fastest option. Turned out even they needed time.

Also is Derby like AMRAAM?

Yes. Derby is Israels answer to AMRAAM optimized for shorter ranged combat (reportedly) since it uses the propulsion from the famous Python-5 missile with a new radar seeker. It was reportedly a JV with South Africa (who gave part of the funding) and produced it at Denel as R-Darter. So its RMax may be (reportedly) around 60 odd Km, whereas an AMRAAM C7 would be around 80 Km. Of course, kinetic speed of the launch platform can add more range depending on altitude and these are all estimates. On the plus side, its light and small too.
IMHO, its an interim fit till Astra's arrive in numbers.

Tsarkar, If the new AESA radar is fitted will the Derby work with it? Right now the specs say monopulse ELTA radar with Derby similar to the LUSH.

If Israeli yes. If Indian yes, but will be an effort. We have made Astra work with Su-30's Bars.

To my simple mind looks like the MMR goals have changed to AESA radar from the old MMR.
KaranM?

They have. AESAs come with more weight and cooling plus power challenges. On the other hand, they offer phenomenal MTBF (if the software is proven) since the hardware has graceful degradation, a few TRMs can conk out and still the radar works as versus a TWT failing and the whole mech radar failing. They offer much faster scan times giving pilot rapid situational awareness (beam revisit time is in micro to milli seconds as versus tens of seconds for scans using a mechanical antenna) and can track separate targets widely spaced. On negative side, weight, cost, power, heating apart, they also usually have scan angles between 60 degrees whereas MSAs (mech scanned antenna) can scan widely around. For light fighters adding a gimbal to rotate a heavy AESA is generally not plausible. Plus better ECCM. Can track A2G targets too simultaneously if software allows for it.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jun 2015 21:49

ramana: http://civil.iisc.ernet.in/nsglec2013.pdf
p.28

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 08 Jun 2015 21:56

Wonder which version is for Tejas & is this why Brit are playing delaying Radome game

“It’s in production for two foreign customers,” says Igo Licht, director of sales and marketing for Elta.Licht declines to identify the customers or fighter types involved in the sales contracts. IAI has described the EL/M-2052 as generally suitable for single-engined aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-16, Northrop F-5, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21, IAI Kfir Block 60 and the Hindustan Aeronautics Tejas light combat aircraft.Licht described the export versions of the EL/M-2052 now in production as having two different sizes. One is equipped with “something like 512” T/R modules. The other export customer has “a little more than 300” T/R modules, as the antenna “was adapted to the nose of the fighter”.Israel has pursued AESA radar technology for fighter aircraft at a great expense, despite the absence of a domestic market. The US government prohibited Israel from installing AESA radar on the F-16I fighter, which is instead equipped with the mechanically scanned APG-68(V)9 radar. Likewise, Lockheed will deliver the F-35A in 2016 with the same Northrop APG-81 radar supplied to other customers.Elta, however, has invested heavily to stay competitive, with domestic foundries producing “thousands” of T/R modules every year, Licht says.“We have in Elta very significant experience in [electronically scanned array] radars,” he says.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Jun 2015 21:58

RamaY wrote:Thanks (for being patient) saar. Will go thru them.

NP sir. There are those who want to understand national programs, always ready to share data with that group.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Jun 2015 21:59

Jhujar wrote:Wonder which version is for Tejas & is this why Brit are playing delaying Radome game
“It’s in production for two foreign customers,” says Igo Licht, director of sales and marketing for Elta.Licht declines to identify the customers or fighter types involved in the sales contracts. IAI has described the EL/M-2052 as generally suitable for single-engined aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-16, Northrop F-5, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21, IAI Kfir Block 60 and the Hindustan Aeronautics Tejas light combat aircraft.Licht described the export versions of the EL/M-2052 now in production as having two different sizes. One is equipped with “something like 512” T/R modules. The other export customer has “a little more than 300” T/R modules, as the antenna “was adapted to the nose of the fighter”.Israel has pursued AESA radar technology for fighter aircraft at a great expense, despite the absence of a domestic market. The US government prohibited Israel from installing AESA radar on the F-16I fighter, which is instead equipped with the mechanically scanned APG-68(V)9 radar. Likewise, Lockheed will deliver the F-35A in 2016 with the same Northrop APG-81 radar supplied to other customers.Elta, however, has invested heavily to stay competitive, with domestic foundries producing “thousands” of T/R modules every year, Licht says.“We have in Elta very significant experience in [electronically scanned array] radars,” he says.

Interesting link. Brit radome is for MMR current.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jun 2015 22:09

nice table for ref
http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/adva ... sites.aspx

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Jun 2015 22:36

We dont have the AESA yet. Its only a proposal. Old timers would recall even Kopyo-M was stated to be there for LCA. We ultimately put our scanners on the 2032.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jun 2015 22:58

KaranM or anyone, Can Someone write an article documenting the ADA quest for MMR from the time the LCA was proposed? I think there were quite few tie-ups.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jun 2015 23:01

SaiK wrote:nice table for ref
http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/adva ... sites.aspx

Most likely its quartz fiber in BMI resin for high temperature environment.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Jun 2015 23:21

Digging deeper I found the original Ind Exp article describing the six milestones to be achieved in 15 months from Jan 15, 2015.

Looks like we have fairly good idea on the refuling probe and the linkage between Derby, radar and radome.

Here is the scoop on the gun firing trials: Jan 14, 2015 publication date

Tejas needs to cross 6 mile stones in 15 months

The Russian-made 23 mm GSH gun is the next in line to be integrated to the aircraft. Capable of firing at 3,600 to 4,000 rpm, the integration of this gun is seen as a challenge considering the vibrations involved during action.

“Lots of surrounding LRUs need to be certified again for higher level of vibration. Ground firing or butt firing needs to be done initially before getting the gun onboard Tejas. The projectile speed of the gun is around 750 meter per second,” he said.

He should have talked of the shock level or how many gs?

IOW there was no intention of gun integration. If the LRUs are now being qualified for the g-loads from firing trials what were the LCA program managers thinking? At a minimum the LRUs should have been qualified to an expected loads profile for the gun firing as its not a new gun. It flies on Mig-21 and Su-30 MKI and thus its load profile is a known entity. And then compare the loads to the LCA structure response.

Other good nuggets in the article:

Tejas will also have an air-to-air refuelling probe (Cobham, UK) in the FOC configuration. “We have started the integration work. Similar work was done on Jaguar and AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning and Control) platform. We have the expertise now,” Tamil Mani said here.

The Tejas will also increase the angle of attack from 22 to 24 degrees enabling the pilot to go for care-free manoeuvring.

The braking system of Tejas will also need to be improved. “The heat capacity needs to be increased. Else we will have to put a better cooling mechanism for the brakes, similar to the fans in the MiGs,” Tamil Mani said.

The nose cone radome of Tejas is another part that is expected to get a relook. “Now the radome is made of composite materials and we will change it to quartz. Today we are getting a radar range of 45-50 km and we need to improve the same to 80-plus km with the new material,” the official said.

The comment on braking system needing fans or workaround shows this is IOC2+ issue.

So braking system issue is not settled.-----
And
LCA finally gets a radar

The LSP-3 model of the aircraft carried a radar inside its nose for the first time. This comes more than 9 years after it first took to skies. The Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) described the radar as Multi-mode radar.

Defence Aviation has learnt that the radar was a Hybrid version of Israel’s Elta EL/M-2032 which is currently in service with Indian Navy on its Sea Harrier fleet. The radar is mechanically steered and most components are of Indian origin. The processor of the radar is of Israeli origin similar to that found on the EL/M-2032. There was some confusion regarding the type of radar but it has now been confirmed that it is Doppler pulse radar.
......
The Hybrid MMR won’t be seen on the future versions of the aircraft apart from the first 40 as the Electronics and Radar Development Establishment (LRDE) is working on a much advance Active Electronically Scanner Array radar (AESA) which be much superior to the Hybrid MMR. The new AESA radar is necessary for the Tejas to receive the Final operations clearance (FOC).

So if the LCA 1.5 with Israeli radar is another goal change.

HAL/ADA should quit tinkering and deliver what was already agreed to.
Stop that futuristic baloney. Stick to current reality.

15 months is not much time. Already radome is facing late delivery from Cobham and warranted visit from IAF. Should have been in India by Jan 2015.

Are the refueling probes on time?

This Uttam thing, do they have paper designs and prototypes ready for testing? Or another blue sky futuristic vision thing?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Jun 2015 01:11

HAL should never re-invent or get into R&D. They should rather r&d on "product and production engineering" concurrent engineering etc. and feed back into product/production life-cycles. If they do have some capabilities on r&d, then it is time to merge those projects into DRDO lab scope.

I guess ADA is okay to do the R&D and along with NAL they should come under DRDO mgmt.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Jun 2015 01:48

Thanks for the explanation Deejayji.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Jun 2015 02:03

IOC 2 data

Christened Tejas, or bright like sunlight, the Indian Light Combat Aircraft is the smallest, light weight, single engine, single seat, supersonic, multirole, combat aircraft and is one of the best in its class in the world.

Its digital fly-by-wire flight control system ensures acceptable handling qualities while ensuring adequate safety throughout the flight envelope.

The advanced Glass cockpit open architecture system complements piloting. Four variants of Tejas aircraft (Combat variant, Trainer and Naval variants) are being developed for land and carrier borne operations.

The Initial Operational Clearance-1 (IOC-I) for ‘Tejas’ was achieved on 10 Jan 2011. In IOC-I, the Aircraft had a few limitations in terms of Combat performance, turn around time and its weaponisation which had to be refined and improved through Research & Development process. In addition to this, Wake penetration trials for Navy, all weather clearances were planned beyond IOC-1.

Since IOC-1, ‘Tejas’ has accomplished significant milestones. Till date, more than 2500 sorties have been completed to achieve the flight test goals towards IOC-2. The design issues were resolved with System Engineering approach and by periodical reviews with participation of external experts. The salient features which have been achieved in IOC-2 include Safe flying up to High angle of Attack as mandated by the users. This has considerably enhanced the combat performance of the aircraft.

The Flight control system evaluation has also been completed. The time for initial built-in test has been reduced considerably which enables faster turn-around and enhanced operational readiness of the aircraft. The Brake system has been improved significantly in terms of energy absorption capability during landing, thus ensuring prompt turn-around of the aircraft. Significant improvement in Cockpit ergonomic and lighting system has been accomplished for improved night flying.

In-flight re-light capability has also been demonstrated to ensure enhanced safety and reliability of the aircraft. Aircraft do often have flameouts, and relighting of the engine is an important requirement for pilot and aircraft safety and continued flying.

The aircraft uses GE 404 engines, and its successful integration is a major achievement. For the Mark-II, GE would supply the upgraded Ge 414 engine.

Avionics and Weapon systems of the aircraft have been revamped for effective mission superiority. A Helmet Mounted Display Sight (HMDS) has been fully integrated in Tejas, and R73E missile firing has been successfully demonstrated using HMDS.

The Multi Mode Weapon multirole capability of Tejas was demonstrated during its participation in the Iron Fist exercise last year. Air to Ground mission and Air to Air missions were demonstrated by dropping Laser Guided Bombs and R73E firing in a single pass. Laser Guided Bomb firing has been achieved for IOC-2 to user’s satisfaction.

Aircraft readiness for missions in terms of its readiness and Operational Readiness Platform (ORP) and Turn Round Service (TRS) and easier maintainability has been achieved as per requirement thus enhancing operational readiness of the aircraft. Tejas has passed all the tests for “All Weather Clearance” of the aircraft. The Aircraft has been cleared for fly without any telemetry support, that is on its own without guidance from ground control.

IOC-2 shall enable the Air Force to carry out air superiority and offensive air support missions, forward air field operations, all weather multi role operations, Electronic counter measures and night flying operations.

LCA Tejas is capable of flying nonstop to destinations over 1700 km away (Ferry Range). It’s Radius of Action is up to 500 km depending upon the nature and duration of actual combat.

LCA is powered by the F404/ IN20- a well proven turbofan engine, designed and manufactured by General Electric Aircraft Engines, USA. The Engine is modular in construction, consisting of six modules, ensuring easy maintenance. The F404-GE-IN20 is a low bypass turbofan engine, with augmented thrust provided by the afterburner.

http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories ... IOC-II.htm

So current braking system is probably "ok" whereas by FOC it has to be "ideal".

Latest performance figures.
Saurav Jha a year later
http://www.ibnlive.com/blogs/india/saur ... 48651.html

As far as I am concerned the program really materialized in the mid-1990s and the air staff requirement (ASR) of 1995 that was agreed to by ADA at the time broadly set the ultimate performance objectives for the project. With reference to the 1995 ASR, the Mk-I has already exceeded the angle of attack (AoA) requirement of 24 degrees, by some two degrees (i.e it has achieved 26 degrees), which is highly commendable and comparable to the best that the Mirage 2000 could do. This could even be increased to 28 degrees in the future. High alpha testing of course meant that parachutes and related systems developed by the Defence Development and Research Organization's (DRDO's) Aerial Delivery Research and Development Establishment (ADRDE) for spin recovery were integrated into test aircraft as a safety measure, though they were of course never required to deploy. The Mk-I has also demonstrated +7G and has flown at a maximum Mach number of 1.6 at altitude.

SP-2 meanwhile is expected to be ready by March 2015 and at least four units in all will be delivered to the Indian Air force (IAF) before the end of 2015 in order for it to form a mini-squadron in Bangalore itself. These aircraft are of course part of the initial 20 unit order for Tejas MK-Is and sport a configuration that received Initial Operational Clearance-2 (IOC-2) in December 2013. Once the full 20 unit order is executed, the IAF will operationalize a squadron at Sulur. A further 20 units will also be purchased by the IAF from HAL's production line, though these will be of a configuration that has been accorded final operational clearance (FOC).

Final operational clearance

However FOC for the Tejas Mk-I is now expected to be achieved only by late 2015. This, according to Dr K. Tamilmani, Director General (Aero),DRDO, is chiefly on account of delays in receiving two significant parts from an overseas vendor that will need to be certified for FOC acceptance. These are of course a bolt on inflight refuelling (IFR) probe and a new quartz nose cone radome, both of which are being procured from different divisions of UK's Cobham. While the Tejas program was earlier expecting to receive the IFR probe by September 2014 and the quartz nose cone by November 2014, it seems that the probe will only reach Indian shores by the end of January 2015 and the first of a total three units of the new nose cone will arrive a month or so later. It is understood that IAF teams have been making visits to Cobham to lean on them to deliver these items faster.

'If Cobham had kept its delivery timelines, the idea was to wrap up ground check outs for the IFR probe in October-November and then commence flight trials says. Some 20-25 day/night flights at different altitudes and speeds would be needed to clear the IFR system and had the probe been delivered in September, it would have easily been cleared before mid-2015', says Dr Tamilmani . He also says that adding the probe itself and flying it is not an issue since it has already been integrated on the hi-fidelity Tejas simulator developed by DRDO's Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) and has even been flown by test-pilots on it.

Now the new quartz nose cone supplied by Cobham replaces an indigenous one and is expected to help the Mk-I's multi-mode radar (MMR) (which has an indigenous antenna and scanner but an Elta EL/M-2032 processing back end) achieve 60 per cent more range than with the latter. The indigenous nose cone has of course already been fully qualified for all modes of the MMR but the current loss through this composite part limits the MMR's detection range to around 50 kms for a fighter sized target and this is expected to increase to more than 80 kms with the new quartz nose cone.

According to Dr Tamilmani, the first nose cone that Cobham made 'had problems' with appreciable losses which led them to making a second cone that is still undergoing structural load tests in the UK. This second nose cone will be supplied to India only in February 2015 and besides spot checks some 50 sorties will have to be flown to qualify this new nose cone. Though three Tejas flight vehicles outfitted with the MMR are ready to receive the new quartz nose cones, the delivery schedule is staggered with the remaining two being delivered at an interval of a month each after the first one. So as per Dr Tamilmani, there are no technological issues deferring FOC but merely process related ones subject to the vagaries of the foreign supplier for the two aforesaid parts.

Now while the Tejas Mk-I does boast many frontline technologies, its aerodynamic performance unfortunately cannot meet the 1995 ASR in its entirety. Truth be told the ASR agreed upon by ADA at the time would in any event have been difficult for the Mk-I to achieve in its current state with or without canards. This is perhaps a reason why only forty units of the Tejas Mk-I fighter version have been ordered till date by the IAF. An order for 16 units of the type trainer developed for the Mk-I are also expected from the IAF, with the definitive configuration for it taking to the air last month in the form of PV-6. The IAF has also had concerns about the Mk-I's turn-around time and wanted certain modifications not all of which could be executed on the Mk-I design which has obviously been frozen ages ago. Over the years there were also additional requirements raised by the IAF to keep the aircraft contemporary which included things like the integration of a supersonic drop tank and these were met according to Dr Tamilmani. Anyway concerns about maintenance apart, the Mk-I has shown its reliability by flying up to three sorties on a single day during trials in both Leh and Jaisalmer on several occasions.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 09 Jun 2015 02:34

Don't mean to sound like a Sanskrit Nazi but it amuses me that we (including moi) fall into the trap of calling a naming 'christening' as in "Christened Tejas, or bright like sunlight".

Not too long ago, when asking for first names in India, it was common for the questioner to ask "christian name"?

OT for sure but had to make the point in context.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Jun 2015 02:36

^^ sad but true!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Jun 2015 02:37

On topic, from above FOC is but a matter of time. Crucial will be HAL production in quantity and timely quality (not return, fix and return).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Jun 2015 03:47

Its now June 2015, has Cobham delivered the two critical items : IFR and Radome?

Should be Jan 2015 for IFR and Feb or March for the radome.

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 09 Jun 2015 04:50

ramana wrote:Its now June 2015, has Cobham delivered the two critical items : IFR and Radome?

Should be Jan 2015 for IFR and Feb or March for the radome.

As you said. I remember reading the "Janes books of future fighters" in the early 80´s and reading about LCA and the Gripen. Now over 30 years later only one of them have come true, but still keep trying HAL! The world needs moore fighters for us nerds out there!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jun 2015 06:37

deejay wrote: So a pilot is no one special, it is his/her training and time plus cost to train that makes his loss / attrition more difficult to replace. Hence, unnecessary losses may be avoided in war.

I read a famous autobiography of an ace Japanese Zero pilot Saburo Sakai who wrote that in the initial years of war Japanese pilots were very effective because of prolonged and top notch training compared to the US apart from some advantages the Zero had. Later because of attrition training became shorter and shorter during the war.

Ultimately the Japanese Air Force was reduced to "swarm attacks" by soosai Kamikaze pilots - some if I recall younger than 18 years of age.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Jun 2015 07:10

Karan M wrote:IOC 2 data
...
Avionics and Weapon systems of the aircraft have been revamped for effective mission superiority. A Helmet Mounted Display Sight (HMDS) has been fully integrated in Tejas, and R73E missile firing has been successfully demonstrated using HMDS.

The Multi Mode Weapon multirole capability of Tejas was demonstrated during its participation in the Iron Fist exercise last year. Air to Ground mission and Air to Air missions were demonstrated by dropping Laser Guided Bombs and R73E firing in a single pass. Laser Guided Bomb firing has been achieved for IOC-2 to user’s satisfaction.

Aircraft readiness for missions in terms of its readiness and Operational Readiness Platform (ORP) and Turn Round Service (TRS) and easier maintainability has been achieved as per requirement thus enhancing operational readiness of the aircraft. Tejas has passed all the tests for “All Weather Clearance” of the aircraft. The Aircraft has been cleared for fly without any telemetry support, that is on its own without guidance from ground control.

IOC-2 shall enable the Air Force to carry out air superiority and offensive air support missions, forward air field operations, all weather multi role operations, Electronic counter measures and night flying operations.

LCA Tejas is capable of flying nonstop to destinations over 1700 km away (Ferry Range). It’s Radius of Action is up to 500 km depending upon the nature and duration of actual combat.
...

Now isn't that considered as "combat-ready"

... contrary to DDM reporting.

...
With reference to the 1995 ASR, the Mk-I has already exceeded the angle of attack (AoA) requirement of 24 degrees, by some two degrees (i.e it has achieved 26 degrees), which is highly commendable and comparable to the best that the Mirage 2000 could do. This could even be increased to 28 degrees in the future.
...

So in some areas LCA Mk-I has exceeded the ASR. We keep hearing about how it did not meet some parameters of ASR but hardly hear about the areas Mk-I has exceeded it. I'm sure there are a quite a few in this department.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 09 Jun 2015 07:16

A single-engine, single-pilot fighter plane is a very attractive concept, most people are fascinated by it. But like everything else, perhaps its age is coming to an end. I am increasingly skeptical that they offer any advantage compared to a UCAV with missiles. Think about it: the fighter is as big and expensive as it is, mainly because it has a carry a human. What advantage does the human really bring? Decisions on identifying friend from foe? At > Mach 0.6, that is hard. Maneuvering to defeat enemy attacks? A UCAV can manever just as fast as any missile, which is much faster (larger Gs) than a human can survive. Maybe LCA will be the Last (human-piloted) Combat Aircraft? The Strike Mission is particularly wasteful - those $85M - $150M Flying Chariots being sent into danger to strike a $0.002 mud hut with a $0.000001 paki inside. Isn't it done much better today with unmanned systems?

I look at Brazil and Switzerland buying Gripens - what the heck for? Which makes the Gripen an ideal choice for them

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jun 2015 07:17

IJN problems were three - they started the war with 6 big carriers and could not add any more. the US ended the war with a total of 99 carriers incl some of the big ones like essex class.

US started with older fighters but introduced better ones like corsair and hellcat. IJN could not deploy anything better than the Zero.

their core pilot cadre, veterans of pearl harbour was wiped out badly in Midway (4 air wings lost) and their training system unable to cope and produce more.

but for a resource starved nation with limited landmass, they put a very serious fight against the superpower.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jun 2015 07:18

long range strike will be delegated to UCAVs and cruise missles by 2040 with US leading the way. its inevitable.
even targets of opportunity and moving targets are now engageable by loitering ELO platforms given vast improvements in sensors...you no longer need a manned visual low level pass or using a LDP to confirm.

each ASTOR/JSTARs type platform could perhaps control a squadron of drones and ucavs and assign missions to them based on GMTI or else direct them to go back and refuel and report back for duty......unlike humans these things could be up in the air for days..like global hawk already has they would have automatic takeoff, landing and find their own way back to base when let go by the controller...the base people would check them out, refuel, rearm and push them into a line ready for takeoff when command is given by airborne controller.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 09 Jun 2015 07:23

Or they could hide in caves for months - they don't need to eat, don't need to even pee and won't go running off if they see a pretty UCAVini.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 09 Jun 2015 07:58

SaiK wrote:HAL should never re-invent or get into R&D. They should rather r&d on "product and production engineering" concurrent engineering etc. and feed back into product/production life-cycles. If they do have some capabilities on r&d, then it is time to merge those projects into DRDO lab scope.

I guess ADA is okay to do the R&D and along with NAL they should come under DRDO mgmt.

Which makes complete sense. However HAL is no great shakes in the production engineering area either. Jawaharlal Nehru conceived of the PSUs including HAL as dominating the "commanding heights of the economy" and bootstrapping India to industrial self-sufficiency. That did not come about for several reasons, principal among which are accountability and transparency. Nehru based his vision on the successes (sic) achieved by the Soviet Union. However he missed the key factor that made the SU's factories perform, as evidenced by this message from Stalin on Illyushin IL-2 Shturmovik production during WW2:

You have let down our country and our Red Army. You have the nerve not to manufacture IL-2s until now. Our Red Army now needs IL-2 aircraft like the air it breathes, like the bread it eats. Shenkman produces one IL-2 a day and Tretyakov builds one or two MiG-3s daily. It is a mockery of our country and the Red Army. I ask you not to try the government's patience, and demand that you manufacture more ILs. This is my final warning.

Source Wikipedia.

Now imagine how that kind of warning would play out in the Indian context with the Department of Defence Production, the Ministry of Industry, HAL management and the unions...

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 09 Jun 2015 10:48

Very busy LCA day in Bangalore.

One? LCA has been zipping around over the city for the last half hour. Circuits and bumps likely, since I am on the flight path, if it is only one.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Jun 2015 10:53

rajanb wrote:Very busy LCA day in Bangalore.

One? LCA has been zipping around over the city for the last half hour. Circuits and bumps likely, since I am on the flight path, if it is only one.

Saw it too..and it appeared to be in primer, although I'm not sure if it was just the way the light reflected off it..hope its SP-2.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 09 Jun 2015 11:03

Kartik wrote:
rajanb wrote:Very busy LCA day in Bangalore.

One? LCA has been zipping around over the city for the last half hour. Circuits and bumps likely, since I am on the flight path, if it is only one.
Saw it too..and it appeared to be in primer, although I'm not sure if it was just the way the light reflected off it..hope its SP-2.

it banks to port so I just get to see the Delta and it becomes a speck very quickly. But I thought I saw the nose cone was white?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 09 Jun 2015 11:04

Kartik wrote:
rajanb wrote:Very busy LCA day in Bangalore.

One? LCA has been zipping around over the city for the last half hour. Circuits and bumps likely, since I am on the flight path, if it is only one.
Saw it too..and it appeared to be in primer, although I'm not sure if it was just the way the light reflected off it..hope its SP-2.

Should be fairly easy to make out the difference between grey paint and Boeing green primer

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Jun 2015 11:35

chetak wrote:

Should be fairly easy to make out the difference between grey paint and Boeing green primer

it wasn't in green primer Chetak..looked to be a darker shade of grey..but somehow didn't appear to be painted. a shade almost akin to the Naval LCA when it wasn't yet painted. but like I said earlier, perhaps my eyes were playing tricks.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 09 Jun 2015 11:41

Kartik wrote:
chetak wrote:

Should be fairly easy to make out the difference between grey paint and Boeing green primer

it wasn't in green primer Chetak..looked to be a darker shade of grey..but somehow didn't appear to be painted. a shade almost akin to the Naval LCA when it wasn't yet painted. but like I said earlier, perhaps my eyes were playing tricks.

Wokay, saar. Understood.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 09 Jun 2015 13:20

rajanb wrote:
it banks to port so I just get to see the Delta and it becomes a speck very quickly. But I thought I saw the nose cone was white?

White nose cone? Any chance the Cobham fellas came through?

Related noob booch: Are nose nose cones painted with some radar transparent paint?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 09 Jun 2015 13:43

^^^ It was a regular LCA with white DTs.

One LCA, two Darin 3 upgrade Jaguars, one taxi check IJT, 01 lime green IJT flight, 01 Mig 21 and LCH TD 3 flight apart from some touch and go's by an AN 32. These I saw. Yes, a busy day today after yesterday's relative lull. NLCA flew once last week.

LCH was mostly at hover with some tough tailwind rearwards flight, surely they must be exploring the limits - winds were 12-15 knts gusting higher.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 09 Jun 2015 14:08

UlanBatori wrote:A single-engine, single-pilot fighter plane is a very attractive concept, most people are fascinated by it. But like everything else, perhaps its age is coming to an end. I am increasingly skeptical that they offer any advantage compared to a UCAV with missiles. Isn't it done much better today with unmanned systems?

Cut or jam the comm link between unmanned aircraft and operator and the UCAV will have to operate completely autonomously. Using only its sensors, it would have to detect and destroy hostile aircraft - which is no easy task.

Its easy enough to simply fly to a location and drop ordinance on a site, much more difficult to identify a moving and often non visible target and then destroy it.

If you've ever signed up for a free email account, you've probably run into CAPTCA type mechanism where you have to type in the numbers and letters you see in the graphic to proceed. Writing an algorithm to recognize captca is tricky enough, imagine having to recognize unseen threats in the air and neutralize them. Often times this has to take place beyond the visual range.

Essentially a long range fire and forget air to air missile is a mini UCAV so whatever great benefit ucavs offer can be de!onstrated on that platform first.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 09 Jun 2015 17:19

Writing an algorithm to recognize captca is tricky enough, imagine having to recognize unseen threats in the air and neutralize them. Often times this has to take place beyond the visual range.

All true. All assume that the tele-operation link is cut or jammed, so that becomes the key battlefield.
Static target recognition appears to have been mastered (cruise missiles, Gulf war, going in through pakistan ventilators) but may need ground intel a short time b4 the attack, so that puts several human agents at extreme risk.

if the target can be made to look different, it can also fool the human pilots, so that is a wash. Electronic detectors may be less fool-able because they can look for things that the human cannot see, and cannot be disguised.
If jamming is effective at close range, then the link between a human LCA and a missile can also be jammed. Also, all the 'net-centric warfare' gobbledygook of the Just a Sell-Fone is kaput.
Now we get to protecting Space/high-altitude UAV assets so that the tele-op link is maintained.
So what we are saying is that the human-piloted aircraft is needed when the other types are rendered inop - meaning war is going badly already. I don't disagree, which is why we need a whole lot of LCAs where the baseline operation is mostly human, or not "net-centric". And I hope they have MANY grass/ roadway airfields to land for the few who come back.

But look at my main point: I submit that the Fighter Plane today is mainly a shiny bargaining chip. Buy $10B worth of F/A-18s or, hey, C-17s are fine too. Or solar panels. Or a couple of nuclear plants. But give us $10B in exchange for support at the Nuclear Cartel. 36Rafales instead of 126, ok if you want the Areva. Plus some help on Thorium. Toss in some Chateau L'If 1812 and some Parful Le Yves St. Laurent s'il vous plais. But hey, how about 50 Pak-FGAs - or would you prefer a couple of aircraft carriers?
There is no seriousness about the human-piloted fighter plane. Whatever the Generals and the Baboon plan to do with these, it is not to win wars by shooting missiles or guns from the aircraft.
I am saying, maybe it is time to recognize this?
Consider the Gripen again: it uses - guess what? The F-404 engine!!!!!

So is it OK to import a Volvo plant instead of the Gripens? I don't think Mantris want to ride in Saabs with their Heated Seats.

srin · Post by **srin** » 09 Jun 2015 17:37

UB-ji, a loitering UCAV on a one-way strike mission is something we need to have hundreds of. It is called Nirbhay (Philiposky would called it Brahmos

) and I keep hoping we start mass-producing it, but it just keeps getting delayed.

We also need to mass produce to UCAV on one-way air superiority mission - aka long-range SAMs. Now fitting a turbofan on them for loitering - that would be a novel idea.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 09 Jun 2015 18:01

Neshant wrote:
UlanBatori wrote:A single-engine, single-pilot fighter plane is a very attractive concept, most people are fascinated by it. But like everything else, perhaps its age is coming to an end. I am increasingly skeptical that they offer any advantage compared to a UCAV with missiles. Isn't it done much better today with unmanned systems?
Cut or jam the comm link between unmanned aircraft and operator and the UCAV will have to operate completely autonomously. Using only its sensors, it would have to detect and destroy hostile aircraft - which is no easy task.

Its easy enough to simply fly to a location and drop ordinance on a site, much more difficult to identify a moving and often non visible target and then destroy it.

If you've ever signed up for a free email account, you've probably run into CAPTCA type mechanism where you have to type in the numbers and letters you see in the graphic to proceed. Writing an algorithm to recognize captca is tricky enough, imagine having to recognize unseen threats in the air and neutralize them. Often times this has to take place beyond the visual range.

Essentially a long range fire and forget air to air missile is a mini UCAV so whatever great benefit ucavs offer can be de!onstrated on that platform first.

If the link to the UAV is cut or otherwise disrupted, the UAV is always programmed to return to it's point of origin. At least the ones that we operate follow this protocol.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 09 Jun 2015 18:40

Tejas-killer is back on the table

Swedish Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist coming with Gripen NG fighter aircraft offer

NEW DELHI: Swedish Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist will arrive here tomorrow on a four-day visit during which he is expected to offer Gripen NG fighter aircraft or a possible joint collaboration in manufacturing single engine light combat planes.

Gripen is a far better version of India's indigenous light combat aircraft Tejas which has been in the making for nearly 30 years.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Jun 2015 18:45

Kakkaji wrote:Tejas-killer is back on the table

Swedish Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist coming with Gripen NG fighter aircraft offer

NEW DELHI: Swedish Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist will arrive here tomorrow on a four-day visit during which he is expected to offer Gripen NG fighter aircraft or a possible joint collaboration in manufacturing single engine light combat planes.

Gripen is a far better version of India's indigenous light combat aircraft Tejas which has been in the making for nearly 30 years.

What utter garbage in reporting..BTW did Sweden pay HAL for license production since the Gripen is a version of the Tejas?

Gripen is a far better version of India's indigenous light combat aircraft Tejas which has been in the making for nearly 30 years.

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst