LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 19:33

No certainty yet on what is dead or what is not.... The Mk2 offers aero improvements and weight reduction + more powerful engine. It will be > than any Mk1.5

Will · Post by **Will** » 04 Oct 2015 19:34

The MK-2 can't really be cancelled. It's needed by the navy. The thrust of the current engine just doesn't cut it for the navy. So yes , more confusion as usual.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Oct 2015 19:39

Will wrote:The MK-2 can't really be cancelled. It's needed by the navy. The thrust of the current engine just doesn't cut it for the navy. So yes , more confusion as usual.

But cancelling IAF order for MK2 makes MK2 development even more expensive and delayed. Making only 50 odd a/c for IN is not very encouraging proposition.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 04 Oct 2015 19:48

Karan M wrote:No certainty yet on what is dead or what is not.... The Mk2 offers aero improvements and weight reduction + more powerful engine. It will be > than any Mk1.5

Of course. This should be the only solution. Have a feeling we'll find out more over the next few weeks.

Another possibility is the solah is being brought into the game to extract more concessions from the French. After the rafale deal is sealed the LCA numbers will come up which is why a few of his statements were a bit ambiguous.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Oct 2015 19:54

IF new line is for solah or gripen or any other mrca candidate, mk2 would be dead or v.close to it. But mk2 death in itself is not such a bad idea, I had suggested the same years ago...so long as the resources are put into the amca, which is what seems to be happening. But many more orders for mk1 are needed. The chief it's not clear what bird the other line is for, more tejas at faster rate maybe?

Scary thing is that if iaf only settles for 160 tejas, it will have a very top heavy force of overwhelmingly twin engined birds in the future.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 19:57

Who invented the name Mk2?

Might as well ask this question because last time I forgot to ask a question and I regret it. That question was "Has anyone on earth called the acquisition of Rafale as Plan A? If so who did? And when?"

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 19:58

Why is everyone talking about death or cancellation of Mk 2? I put it to you that you guys have not actually bothered watching that video in full and find it easier to post stuff on here

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 04 Oct 2015 20:02

Cain Marko wrote:IF new line is for solah or gripen or any other mrca candidate, mk2 would be dead or v.close to it. But mk2 death in itself is not such a bad idea, I had suggested the same years ago...so long as the resources are put into the amca, which is what seems to be happening. But many more orders for mk1 are needed. The chief it's not clear what bird the other line is for, more tejas at faster rate maybe?

Scary thing is that if iaf only settles for 160 tejas, it will have a very top heavy force of overwhelmingly twin engined birds in the future.

Could be. I think a lot this will rest on the Rafale deal. If it goes through we'll need a cheap single engine sophisticated aircraft (LCA) to help plug the numbers. If the solah steals, there will be too much overlap with MKII so the IAF will just drop it altogether.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Oct 2015 20:03

Karan M wrote:In short what IAF current plan is:
Tejas Mk1 (20: IOC), 20: FOC - all to be brought to Mk1.5 standard (signified by CAS saying we only want Tejas all of 1 standard)
Tejas Mk1.5 (120) - with Mk2 uncertain (discussions are going on, all we want is Tejas)

I hope they add another 6 squadrons for Mk2.

Karan - I think you've summed up the situation well.

But if I may, what the Chief's comment and commitment means is that IAF is focused on what is possible in near term. LCA Mk2 still represents a distant dream and will go through usual hiccup ups. From IAF's perspective, Mk1 and Mk1A are doable, their only concern is the production and delivery timeline.

It might well be the case that given the timeline and present status of work on Tejas Mk2, IAF has better understanding of when it will be delivered. And might not be in agreement with R&D establishment on this aspect. They're looking at definite solutions and IMO, Mk1A represents that solution for IAF.

IMO, as and when Mk2 comes in, it will see induction of at least 120 odd number.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:03

We did watch it. There is a direct question asked there about Mk2 and the Chief replies the IAF is not insisting on it. But he also notes discussions are underway on the Tejas program before that. So not cancelled officially yet.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:07

rohitvats wrote:But if I may, what the Chief's comment and commitment means is that IAF is focused on what is possible in near term. LCA Mk2 still represents a distant dream and will go through usual hiccup ups. From IAF's perspective, Mk1 and Mk1A are doable, their only concern is the production and delivery timeline.

It might well be the case that given the timeline and present status of work on Tejas Mk2, IAF has better understanding of when it will be delivered. And might not be in agreement with R&D establishment on this aspect. They're looking at definite solutions and IMO, Mk1A represents that solution for IAF.

IMO, as and when Mk2 comes in, it will see induction of at least 120 odd number.

Understood about focus on near term. Only issue is if there is no firm commitment for Mk2 from IAF side and only Navy one progresses, getting a late order in might prove a challenge. IMHO ADA should take the bull by the horns, get MOD to get HAL and IAF onboard and do a comprehensive rejig of the Mk2 program to put it firmly in Mirage 2000/Gripen NG class which should meet IAF requirements too. Explore some signature reductions as well. Use the NLCA as a template if necessary but I do think the NLCA may be carrying around a bit of extra weight for naval ruggedization.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Oct 2015 20:12

Karan M wrote:We did watch it. There is a direct question asked there about Mk2 and the Chief replies the IAF is not insisting on it. But he also notes discussions are underway on the Tejas program before that. So not cancelled officially yet.

I take that statement to mean that IAF is not insisting on LCA Mk2 to be the definite version which it will induct in large numbers. 40+120 or 20+120 is being committed for what may be termed as genuine iterative development.

Which I think is a good development. We're earlier talking about 20+20+120 (Mk2), we're there already with Mk1 and Mk1A.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 04 Oct 2015 20:12

Instead of jumping at the prospect of giving 20 IOC LCA, it seems HAL wants to give 38 FOC LCA. This clearly shows HAL has messed up and has not set up the production line even after 12 years , which is also confirmed by CAG.

Raha has basically said give me 160 LCA in any configuration, & we will upgrade them, later. Raha not has not stopped anybody from developing or manufactering Mk-2 which is already sanctioned and is 4 years away.

I think that Mk 1.5 nonsense is a leak by HAL to cover up it's own delay to create an impression of additional demands by IAF as also to favor some sub vendors.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 04 Oct 2015 20:13

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:In short what IAF current plan is:
Tejas Mk1 (20: IOC), 20: FOC - all to be brought to Mk1.5 standard (signified by CAS saying we only want Tejas all of 1 standard)
Tejas Mk1.5 (120) - with Mk2 uncertain (discussions are going on, all we want is Tejas)

I hope they add another 6 squadrons for Mk2.
Karan - I think you've summed up the situation well.

But if I may, what the Chief's comment and commitment means is that IAF is focused on what is possible in near term. LCA Mk2 still represents a distant dream and will go through usual hiccup ups. From IAF's perspective, Mk1 and Mk1A are doable, their only concern is the production and delivery timeline.

It might well be the case that given the timeline and present status of work on Tejas Mk2, IAF has better understanding of when it will be delivered. And might not be in agreement with R&D establishment on this aspect. They're looking at definite solutions and IMO, Mk1A represents that solution for IAF.

IMO, as and when Mk2 comes in, it will see induction of at least 120 odd number.

I have that feeling too. I think we'll see more LCA variants down the line. The French aren't playing ball so the solah may have been brought in to get them to sweeten the deal.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 20:16

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:We did watch it. There is a direct question asked there about Mk2 and the Chief replies the IAF is not insisting on it. But he also notes discussions are underway on the Tejas program before that. So not cancelled officially yet.
I take that statement to mean that IAF is not insisting on LCA Mk2 to be the definite version which it will induct in large numbers. 40+120 or 20+120 is being committed for what may be termed as genuine iterative development.

Which I think is a good development. We're earlier talking about 20+20+120 (Mk2), we're there already with Mk1 and Mk1A.

Interestingly Raha did not mention new engine even once. He did say "Radar, EW, IFR and missiles" which he expected would come in later airframes and earlier ones upgraded. And he said that he would take Tejas as it is without mentioning Mark 1, 2 or whatever. But he did ask for one squadron of IOC configuration LCA. Where is it?

It's about time HAL or someone came clean on this issue.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:18

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:We did watch it. There is a direct question asked there about Mk2 and the Chief replies the IAF is not insisting on it. But he also notes discussions are underway on the Tejas program before that. So not cancelled officially yet.
I take that statement to mean that IAF is not insisting on LCA Mk2 to be the definite version which it will induct in large numbers. 40+120 or 20+120 is being committed for what may be termed as genuine iterative development.

Which I think is a good development. We're earlier talking about 20+20+120 (Mk2), we're there already with Mk1 and Mk1A.

Yes, exactly. No firm confirmation yet of the split between Mk1.5 and Mk2 yet, with indications latter may not be required. Lets see what happens.

Meanwhile, Shukla had noted (he has MOD contacts so his "inside view" counts):

Meanwhile the Tejas Mark II will continue development, say sources in the DRDO, which oversees the Tejas development programme.

A defence ministry official concurs, pointing out: “The Tejas Mark II is not just for the IAF. The navy believes the Naval Tejas must have an F-414 engine to be able to take off from an aircraft carrier’s short deck. So Tejas Mark II development will continue alongside the Mark 1A.”

With the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) --- the DRDO agency that has built the Tejas --- targeting 2022-23 for completing the Tejas Mark II, HAL has seven years of production of the Mark I and the Mark IA before the production line switches over to building the Tejas Mark II. The defence ministry calculates that a 100-Tejas order is essential to keep it working to capacity till 2022-23.

Meanwhile, alongside the Tejas Mark II, ADA would also be working on the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), an indigenous, fifth-generation fighter already on the drawing board. ADA engineers point out that advanced technologies being developed for AMCA would inevitably leak into the Tejas Mark II, making the light fighter more advanced than currently anticipated.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/10/p ... boost.html

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:20

shiv wrote:Interestingly Raha did not mention new engine even once. He did say "Radar, EW, IFR and missiles" which he expected would come in later airframes and earlier ones upgraded. And he said that he would take Tejas as it is without mentioning Mark 1, 2 or whatever. But he did ask for one squadron of IOC configuration LCA. Where is it?

It's about time HAL or someone came clean on this issue.

I wouldn't be surprised if the whole production has ground to a halt with this issue being thrashed out. I hope it hasn't.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Oct 2015 20:21

Here is a super conspiracy theory to ruin your Sunday evening (or morning):

LCA Mk2 not coming because F-16 may well be a reality! So, IAF goes in 2030-35 with LCA Mk1A, Su-30MKI (upgraded to Super-30 series and more added beyond planned 14 squadron to make up for Rafale cancellation) and F-16.

So, we have: LCA (10 sqn) + Su-30 (18 sqn) + F-16 (12 sqn) + M2K (4 sqn) + Mig-29 (3 sqn) + Jaguar (6 sqn) + FGFA ( 7 sqn) = 50 sqn!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 20:23

RoyG wrote: I have that feeling too. I think we'll see more LCA variants down the line. The French aren't playing ball so the solah may have been brought in to get them to sweeten the deal.

Or, India is squeezing a deal from them that will benefit us, ultimately. It took 20 years to get AJT and now it is not only a crucial player but will go on to become a light attack aircraft. We may be looking at long courtship, detailed scrutiny of horoscope and long marriage.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 04 Oct 2015 20:23

I think Ajai Shukla is being used by HAL to leak stories to cover up their own delays. I think their is no demand of MK 1.5 by IAF, Raha has said give us 160 LCA in any configuration.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 04 Oct 2015 20:23

So if HAL has messed up in setting up production lines, why did the IAF wake up now? Why did IAF not have a plan B to own the LCA design, work closely with HAL & MOD to change HAL leadership if necessary to get the job done? This is the worst of us coming out? Shows that the IAF does not believe in themselves or their countrymen. And it also speaks poorly of HAL if IAF's whining is correct.

In the end, India is the loser.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 04 Oct 2015 20:24

shiv wrote:Why is everyone talking about death or cancellation of Mk 2? I put it to you that you guys have not actually bothered watching that video in full and find it easier to post stuff on here

I just went through it and didnt see the Hon. ACM make any mention of conditions for accepting LCA.

It all began with Shiv Aroors tweet,

Ready to induct 120 LCA Mk1 on 2 conditions: higher production rate & proof/demo of radar/missiles/IFR: IAF chief Arup Raha

That Press Conference has no such thing. Dont know if Shiv Aroor has some other quote from the Air Chief.

Infact he said hes expecting 4-6 LCAs by end of next year .. Dont think that should be a problem.. From what I took away from the PC, the Air Chief focused on getting the LCA as is and upgrading them when the 4 technologies are available, which in his words is "the right thing to do".

For some reason though he gave a

when he said IAF will accept "ALL 120" @ 36.13 in the vid ..

One misreported fact about the "conditions" can cause so much heart burn .. Id like to apologize for my previous post/rant.

My bad.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 20:24

rohitvats wrote:

LCA Mk2 not coming

LCA Mk 2 = NLCA

It will come. No other go.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:25

Its not merely Ajai Shukla leaking stories from HAL, there were several others before him. Shukla's contacts in MOD run deep. And the CAS confirms the bit there is a proposal on his desk from ADA/HAL. What he also lets us know is the IAF response to the proposal. "Give us one Tejas" etc etc.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:27

rohitvats wrote:Here is a super conspiracy theory to ruin your Sunday evening (or morning):

LCA Mk2 not coming because F-16 may well be a reality! So, IAF goes in 2030-35 with LCA Mk1A, Su-30MKI (upgraded to Super-30 series and more added beyond planned 14 squadron to make up for Rafale cancellation) and F-16.

So, we have: LCA (10 sqn) + Su-30 (18 sqn) + F-16 (12 sqn) + M2K (4 sqn) + Mig-29 (3 sqn) + Jaguar (6 sqn) + FGFA ( 7 sqn) = 50 sqn!

If you head over to the Rafale thread you'll ignite a bush fire. I know you want to.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 20:27

Vivek K wrote:So if HAL has messed up in setting up production lines, why did the IAF wake up now? Why did IAF not have a plan B to own the LCA design

Rafale was plan B because LCA did not come. There no plan B (yet). LCA was plan A. Mirage 2000 was plan A(1)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:28

LCA isnt in the MMRCA class per IAFs own claims.. so one can't supplant the other

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Oct 2015 20:30

What a mind boggling list saar...but rafale is coming, even if it is just 36 nos.. Ideally second line should be for more tejas...by 2018-19 two lines humming to produce 36 p.a. Till that point we can still have 100 fighters inducted.. 40 tejas, 20 rafale, 40mki or some other combo of same types

After 2019, only tejas and fgfa with lingering rafales..till amca.

Should be enough in terms of numbers, rates of induction and mix. If iaf needs more mrca type, an sqd of rafales could be procured

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 20:31

Karan M wrote:LCA isnt in the MMRCA class per IAFs own claims.. so one can't supplant the other

Absolutely - but this entire concept of inventing an MMRCA requirement taking off from failure of LCA timelines and an IAF request for Mirage 2000 is a recent development (not even 10 years yet

)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:33

What's hilarious is I just realized that the question at 35:00 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7mta-K7FaA) was probably asked by Ajai Shukla hisself...(check the voice, could be him?). Lets see what he says in his next missive.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Oct 2015 20:36

Karan M wrote:What's hilarious is I just realized that the question at 35:00 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7mta-K7FaA) was probably asked by Ajai Shukla hisself...(check the voice, could be him?). Lets see what he says in his next missive.

Ah - I thought the voice and the accent were familiar

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 04 Oct 2015 20:37

Karan M wrote: No increase in 6 squadrons. This is the part that is disappointing but I can live with it.

I didn't hear that. His point was we have ordered 20 IOC, 20 FOC & 120 MK2 right from the beginning. It has not been produced yet, but we are ready to take MORE (~35:50). To the next specific question whether those 120 need to be MK2, we just need those to be tejas with improvements as and when those technologies become available. That sounds reasonable.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 04 Oct 2015 20:37

Vivek K wrote:So if HAL has messed up in setting up production lines, why did the IAF wake up now?

Having UPA and MQ at them helm, who will risk the vanavas?
.............
If US offers F-16 production line (relocating one from US) and all production unit comes around 25 mil, I bet India may opt for F-16. US has every reason to prop a force in Asia to counter China, so they might offer whole production line for dirt cheap. I will not surprise if we built a stealthy HCA based upon GE F110 or F135.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 04 Oct 2015 20:38

All in all, there seems to be some serious shepherding from MOD (read: Manohar Parrikar) on the LCA front. He seems to be working towards addressing the whole gamut of IAF re-equipment requirement. And getting HAL to move and deliver.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 04 Oct 2015 20:39

yeh rohitvats...he dropped an IED and now next 10 pages will be about F-16.. with zero data on any F-16 wagehra on order fer sure...bet he did it after a couple of pegs of scotch just for TP...

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 04 Oct 2015 20:45

shiv wrote:
Vivek K wrote:So if HAL has messed up in setting up production lines, why did the IAF wake up now? Why did IAF not have a plan B to own the LCA design
Rafale was plan B because LCA did not come. There no plan B (yet). LCA was plan A. Mirage 2000 was plan A(1)

As per the post you have quoted, I understood this... If HAL messes up, it is IAF's fault.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Oct 2015 20:48

What ied about solah...when did this happen? Can't blame poor abduls for mutating and consuming whatever small noss of fumes that come to them..hehheh

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 04 Oct 2015 20:51

With ACM accepting LCA, all deliverables are in HAL's hands now. They have no excuse but to deliver. WOrkers need to stop making pakoras during break time as I had alluded to earlier and start delivering now.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 04 Oct 2015 20:52

Funny how both the Army and now the IAF are falling in line on domestic products with the right leadership at the helm. Now for the DPSUs to bring the cheese...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Oct 2015 21:16

Is this the second coming of the MMRCA thread?