LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Apr 2016 11:29

But the LCA is a 3 legged cheetah onlee.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 16 Apr 2016 11:52

As per the picture on the previous page, the three legged cheetah has only one big unmentionable hanging under it.. It's all good though. May its spawn (mk-2. mk-3, amca) fill the skies of tomorrow!

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 16 Apr 2016 15:06

What fabulous photos. Thanks for posting those. +100 to what Cybaru says about a pic a month, etc...

There will be intense campaining against Tejas... The '2 plane squadron' story by that twat Sudhi Ranjan Sen is just a cheap example of it. God only knows the efforts behind the scenes. But don't underestimate the home team people. This has been going on for years and years, but we now have a fighter jet and it is entering service. And miraculously, as Karan M says, a HAL chief is batting for it and the IAF chief is batting for it. The battle against the import lobby will not end nevertheless, it will continue for years and years - until they convert into the export lobby.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 16 Apr 2016 16:20

What the HDR photo does show is that the sheet metal work on the LCA is top notch. Better than most other fighter aircraft. Thanks indranilroy.
Need at least 1000 LCA to be produced over the next 5 years.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Apr 2016 16:26

JE Menon wrote:There will be intense campaining against Tejas... The '2 plane squadron' story by that twat Sudhi Ranjan Sen is just a cheap example of it. God only knows the efforts behind the scenes. But don't underestimate the home team people. This has been going on for years and years, but we now have a fighter jet and it is entering service. And miraculously, as Karan M says, a HAL chief is batting for it and the IAF chief is batting for it. The battle against the import lobby will not end nevertheless, it will continue for years and years - until they convert into the export lobby.

we need an index of these campaigning. I'd suggest a burkha thread opened to collect and connect things, if we think it is a good idea.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Apr 2016 18:10

Mort Walker wrote:What the HDR photo does show is that the sheet metal work on the LCA is top notch. Better than most other fighter aircraft. Thanks indranilroy.
Need at least 1000 LCA to be produced over the next 5 years.

Probably due to 90% of surface area being made up of large carbon fiber composites, which would give that finish texture.

sooraj · Post by **sooraj** » 17 Apr 2016 17:37

TATA built composite structures for LCA

srai · Post by **srai** » 18 Apr 2016 09:45

^^^

Good find. Most of the Tier-1 level components are in the process of being outsourced to local vendors. L&T is making LCA wings while TATA is making tail. Rest of the components, like fuselage (front, mid and rear), are in the cards.

According to recent interview with HAL chairman, the target for outsourcing LCA components manufacture is 80% with remaining 20% final integration to be retained with HAL. This would allow production capacity to increase to 25 LCA/year.

Basically, we are seeing an Indian aerospace ecosystem being erected similar to other advanced nations. There will be quite a few Tier-1 levels that have the ability to manufacture/assemble major aerospace components and who rely on hundreds/thousands of smaller Tier-2/3 parts suppliers and manufacturers.

Soon LCA will be productionized by major public/private aerospace conglomeration and not just HAL. The benefit of that would be a much stronger clout for more indigenous manufacture. When it comes to more orders, it won't just be HAL against the IAF or MoD; it would be HAL/TATA/L&T etc vying for more orders. They would also do a better job when it comes to media interactions, sales and marketing efforts.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Apr 2016 09:56

That is great news, the 25 a year possibility. It can start replacing a squadron and half every year.

I hope the Naval LCA gets a CFT like bulge permanently in place for extra fuel. That would allow an extra 2000 liters plus whatever they can add from the current 3000 liters by adding the plug. Can't be landing often on the carrier with those drop tanks.

srai · Post by **srai** » 18 Apr 2016 10:13

^^^

If quick number of squadrons formation is desired, then some possibilities would be to form an under-strength squadron, such as 8/squadron or 12/squadron. That way @25/year production rates 2 to 3 squadrons could be erected with the intent of that those would be fully staffed in the subsequent years.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Apr 2016 10:27

srai wrote:^^^

If quick number of squadrons formation is desired, then some possibilities would be to form an under-strength squadron, such as 8/squadron or 12/squadron. That way @25/year production rates 2 to 3 squadrons could be erected with the intent of that those would be fully staffed in the subsequent years.

Isn't the squadron formation dependent on the uptime of the planes? More available smaller can do to get a squadron number plated and active?

Bhaskar_T · Post by **Bhaskar_T** » 18 Apr 2016 10:33

2nd pic has right missile bit divergent and more focussed towards Pakistan. Small-photoshop-error in otherwise good pic because parallax doesn't seem to explain it easily?

indranilroy wrote:

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Apr 2016 10:36

IMO the missiles are not photoshopped on. The image has just been HDRed thats it..

srai · Post by **srai** » 18 Apr 2016 11:34

Cybaru wrote:
srai wrote:^^^

If quick number of squadrons formation is desired, then some possibilities would be to form an under-strength squadron, such as 8/squadron or 12/squadron. That way @25/year production rates 2 to 3 squadrons could be erected with the intent of that those would be fully staffed in the subsequent years.
Isn't the squadron formation dependent on the uptime of the planes? More available smaller can do to get a squadron number plated and active?

You may be right.

I was talking more about how squadron formation of new types begin with 4 or 6 seed aircraft. Since the LCA squadrons would be rapidly formed once regular deliveries from production line occur 16-25/year within the next few years and rapid number-plating of MiG-21/27 squadrons, there may be a need to do parallel squadron formation of this new type. Start with some seed aircraft for multiple squadrons while at the same time building up on the infrastructure and training of pilots and maintenance crews. All of these activities take time anyways and a fully capable new squadron formation would take around 3 years. Allocate additional air-frames to those squadrons over subsequent years.

Or an alternative approach is to do more of a linear squadron formation where one fully staffed and resourced is created each year. First one or two squadrons could be used to train all the extra pilots/crews required for a new squadron. Even here, there will be some extra air-frames that would go over to forming the second squadron but one which won't be completed with all the aircraft until the subsequent year.

It may all be a moot-point by the end of it in any case as the total squadron numbers will be the same. Multiple parallel squadron formation with seed air-frames would help with the impression that squadron numbers have stabilized. All 6 squadrons formed within the first two/three years rather than over six years if done linearly. These would still be combat capable but at less strength for the first couple of years or so. This would help with bean counting ... less of the DDMs shouting constantly the IAF down to xx squadrons

DexterM · Post by **DexterM** » 18 Apr 2016 15:15

Had imagined that the trainer versions would be produced first and rushed off to raise the squadrons. As in, the simulators are fine, but am guessing type conversioun and certification would be the first step for pilots.

Deejay saar, could you please rephrase your old post in this context of whether it is more profitable to raise two squadrons simultaneously so we can have more trained pilots ready or does the force prefer to go one full squadron after another?

member_28911 · Post by **member_28911** » 18 Apr 2016 18:24

(HAL chairman) Raju said that the upgraded version of Tejas, with Active Electrically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar, Unified Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite, mid-air refuelling capacity and beyond the vision range missiles, will cost between Rs 275 crore and Rs 300 crore.

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 722_1.html

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 18 Apr 2016 18:36

^How much is that in dollars? (I'm hopeless with numbers). Is it 45 to 46 million dollars?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 18 Apr 2016 18:40

Between $40-$45 Million

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 18 Apr 2016 18:41

Ankar wrote:
(HAL chairman) Raju said that the upgraded version of Tejas, with Active Electrically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar, Unified Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite, mid-air refuelling capacity and beyond the vision range missiles, will cost between Rs 275 crore and Rs 300 crore.
http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 722_1.html

India should just stick in a Kaveri and sell them for 30-35 million dollars.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Apr 2016 19:45

cybaru, RE: CFT

Why not design as "strapped in" rather strapped on above the wings?

So that it is built-in blended inside the skins? get requirements and fix the fuel reqs/design needs.

The internal weight should be less (assume kevlar composites are light weight), and can take various shapes for blending.

fuel weight should be greater than fuel tank weight is a safe assumption of course. IOW, we don't need to go for CFT.
increase internal fuel capacity, plan for the refueling pods and we have better dynamics over the wings

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Apr 2016 20:54

India should continue with kaveri program flight certify it for Tejas, have 4-6 Tejas with kaveri and fly it day in and out and fix any childhood disease we see with new programming.

Without going through this pace we would loose local engine program for good

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Apr 2016 21:20

GTRE is doing the same as above. Anybody who tells you that Kaveri is dead has no clue. Both, Kaveri and the 110-125kN engine are being developed.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 18 Apr 2016 21:37

indranilroy wrote:GTRE is doing the same as above. Anybody who tells you that Kaveri is dead has no clue. Both, Kaveri and the 110-125kN engine are being developed.

We have seen some discussions on K9 & K10 engines. This leads to many half formed ideas in an enthusiastic but non technical mind like mine. I have a few questions - which may even be stupid but are well meaning and not an effort to downplay effort. So if someone can help me here?

a) If you are aware: What are the plans for acquiring a flying test bed? Last mentioned was securing a Su 30 off HAL production line(?). Are there other test beds required but not available?

b) Multiple Engine development programmes are in place both at GTRE and HAL. What are the mutual outreach and oversight mechanisms so as to help speed up R&D, reduce cost and mutually use available talent? I know that they interact regularly.

c) Finally, are all the Kaveri offshoots based on Kabini core or are there further core developments too? Is there any timeline mentioned anywhere?

d) Any progress or news on the same about fulfilling the Gas Turbine requirement for our Naval Ships?

Thank you. Layman explanations would be most helpful.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Apr 2016 21:41

Without the basic Kaveri engine flying with Tejas and getting flight certified is the first step that should be achieved , the second is to get into the daily rigour of squadron service so any issue not observed during certification and maintenance ,tbo , other childhood disease etc are taken care off , its a slow and long task but a critical one that we have to slug it out.

We need to get the basic right first before we move to uprated version of Kaveri. An engine that does not fly in the aircraft it is designed for is no good

Bhaskar_T · Post by **Bhaskar_T** » 18 Apr 2016 23:00

Why a stealthy silence is maintained on FOC, heck I don't even remember what is pending for FOC

? AKM, SauravJha - Could you?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Apr 2016 03:35

deejay wrote: a) If you are aware: What are the plans for acquiring a flying test bed? Last mentioned was securing a Su 30 off HAL production line(?). Are there other test beds required but not available?

I have seen nothing except newspaper reports on getting a flying test bed. I am not entirely sure if a fighter jet can become a flying test bed. The reason why an IL-76 is used as a test bed is because there is a lot of instrumentation for data collection and analysis. I don't know if there is enough room on a fighter jet for the same. It is within GTREs capability to build a flying test bed. The problem is the funding.

deejay wrote: b) Multiple Engine development programmes are in place both at GTRE and HAL. What are the mutual outreach and oversight mechanisms so as to help speed up R&D, reduce cost and mutually use available talent? I know that they interact regularly.

Actually, there is next to no overlap. They collaborate with each other very closely. They need each other.

deejay wrote: c) Finally, are all the Kaveri offshoots based on Kabini core or are there further core developments too? Is there any timeline mentioned anywhere?

Let me get back to you on this. There were tenders for the cores. I think Kabini core is retained in the 125 kN engine.

deejay wrote:
d) Any progress or news on the same about fulfilling the Gas Turbine requirement for our Naval Ships?

Unfortunately, progress on this has been really slow.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Apr 2016 04:21

A red sign board reading:

SP-05
SSEM

?

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 19 Apr 2016 05:17

Tejas jet fighter catches Sri Lanka, Egypt attention.

India’s Light Combat Aircraft Tejas, which was several years in the making, has now caught the attention of foreign buyers with Sri Lanka and Egypt evincing interest in the indigenously built fighter jet.

Sri Lanka had recently rejected Pakistan’s JF-17 aircraft built with Chinese help, while Egypt had last year signed a contract for 24 French-made Rafale fighter jets.

The two countries are interested in the current version of the Tejas and not the upgraded one which will be rolled out later. However, state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), the manufacturer of Tejas, is focusing on delivering the aircraft to the IAF first.

“While there is an interest which has been shown (by other countries), let us get the product first to our own customer. The confidence that will come to others when our own Air Force flies it will be immense. So at first, we should at least meet the initial requirement of the IAF,” HAL chairman T Suvarna Raju told PTI.

Refusing to share information on which are the countries that have evinced interest in Tejas, he expressed confidence in his marketing team and said they are equipped to take forward the talks. However, Defence sources said that the two countries which have evinced interest in Tejas were Sri Lanka and Egypt.

He said the “current version is more than enough” for smaller nations. Two things that go in favour of the Tejas are its lower cost and flying ability.

“We have proved its flying ability and the aircraft, for that class, is a terrific one. We did take some time but we need to remember that DRDO and us did everything from the scratch,” Raju said.

Raju said that the upgraded version of Tejas, with Active Electrically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar, Unified Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite, mid-air refuelling capacity and beyond the vision range missiles, will cost between Rs 275 crore and Rs 300 crore.

Sources said enquiries by foreign countries came during the Bahrain air show in January, the first time that Tejas flew outside the country.

The decision to send Tejas abroad was of Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, who has put his weight behind the aircraft.
LCA Tejas performed 8-G (gravity) pull, vertical loop, slow fly-past and barrel roll at the air show, which the Indian officials described as “historic”.

Interestingly, soon after the announcement of Tejas’ participation in Bahrain, Pakistan had withdrawn its JF-17 aircraft from the show despite having paid the initial installment which ran into a few millions US dollars.

Tejas is perhaps the world’s smallest lightweight, multi-role single engine tactical fighter aircraft.

JF-17 has been developed jointly by the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex and the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation of China. However, experts feel that the aircraft has been assembled in Pakistan from readymade Chinese kits.

HAL is likely to hand over the fourth Tejas aircraft to the Air Force by June end. The four aircraft will make up the first squadron of IAF which will be used for training and familarisation.

Rather than wait for LAC Mk II, IAF had decided to go for an upgraded version of the existing Tejas with over 40 modifications. IAF plans to acquire 120 Tejas aircraft, with 100 of these having major modifications.

As per the production plan, six aircraft will be made this year and HAL will subsequently scale it up to eight and 16 aircraft per year.

The LCA programme was initiated in 1983 to replace the ageing MiG-21s planes in IAF’s combat fleet but has missed several deadlines due to various reasons.

srai · Post by **srai** » 19 Apr 2016 05:45

^^^

That article is not correct on HAL delivering 4th LCA by June. Original plans were for the IAF to have four LCAs to form a squadron but now that has shifted to be July squadron formation with two LCAs. Maybe this is more of one of those official ceremonial thing; although having said that a lot of work has been going on towards squadron formatio, such as manuals and simulator training for pilots and crews and various infrastructure. That article is extrapolating without the production updates that AKM provided in his piece. It was clear that based on where SPs were along in their Jigs and statement by the person in-charge that SP-3 would be completed and flown by July. SP-3 was at final equipping and assembly phase while SP-4 was at coupling stage.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 19 Apr 2016 08:35

indranilroy wrote:....

Hi Indranil, thank you for taking the time and efort. As a follow up, any time lines for any of the above mentioned?

saumitra_j · Post by **saumitra_j** » 19 Apr 2016 09:21

deejay wrote:If you are aware: What are the plans for acquiring a flying test bed? Last mentioned was securing a Su 30 off HAL production line(?). Are there other test beds required but not available?

Deejay sir, from AI 2015 when I interacted with a gent from GTRE, they had completed 3K hours of static testing as well as high altitude testing on IL76. They need to complete 4K hours before they were allowed to test fly it on a twin engine jet and 5K hours before they put it on a twin engine jet. An IAF Mig29 was one of the platforms they wanted to acquire but TBH, I do not know how much time it will take from progressing from 3K hours to 4K hours. They were badly underfunded in UPA times and I just hope that they have been able to get over the funding issues. The problem of acquiring a test bed probably is more acute now given the dwindling strength of the IAF's fighter fleet

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 19 Apr 2016 09:26

srai wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:What the HDR photo does show is that the sheet metal work on the LCA is top notch. Better than most other fighter aircraft. Thanks indranilroy.
Need at least 1000 LCA to be produced over the next 5 years.
Probably due to 90% of surface area being made up of large carbon fiber composites, which would give that finish texture.

I can't recall exactly, but recalling similar close up photos of the Su-30 and Mig-29 sheet metal aren't as good as the LCA.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2016 09:57

I saw the build quality of Su-30 multiple times during late aero india and they were as good if not better compared to late M2K build quality which I must say is superb.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 19 Apr 2016 10:13

saumitra_j wrote:...

Deejay sir, from AI 2015 when I interacted with a gent from GTRE, they had completed 3K hours of static testing as well as high altitude testing on IL76. They need to complete 4K hours before they were allowed to test fly it on a twin engine jet and 5K hours before they put it on a twin engine jet. An IAF Mig29 was one of the platforms they wanted to acquire but TBH, I do not know how much time it will take from progressing from 3K hours to 4K hours. They were badly underfunded in UPA times and I just hope that they have been able to get over the funding issues. The problem of acquiring a test bed probably is more acute now given the dwindling strength of the IAF's fighter fleet

Flying test bed options in the global second hand market / used bird market at reasonable costs and decent aircraft life with all documentation available can be purchased. In fact, there is a big market for such Russian aircraft. I am sure even western options can be exercised.

Point being, IAF may stone wall such transfers and reasons maybe genuine. Alternatives can be found. I hope the funding freeze/ drip has been overcome.

Another thought, since GTRE is specialist in engine r&d, HAL needs engines, why can't HAL fund engine development at GTRE for aircraft it is going to manufacture? LCA is a basket case for such PSU funded initiative. Instead, what is happening is that HAL itself is getting into engine R&D. This has its benefits but I am trying to look at alternatives where the industry moves away from government dependencies.

This is critical because engine development programmes are long term and we may not have a favourable dispensation forever. The delinking of critical funding will be good, IMVHO.

P.S. That Sir doesn't suit me. Also makes me feel old. Hope we can do away with that.

Bhaskar_T · Post by **Bhaskar_T** » 19 Apr 2016 12:10

@deejay - Bingo. This morning, in my exchange with Saurav Jha, he hinted (tweets below) a Mig-29 from Russia for Keveri testing.

The Mig-29 for testing the Kaveri follow-on will come from the Russians. Could be one of those that just lying around in Zhukovsky. (@SJha1618)

@SJha1618 Why Russia will do it for Kaveri when India herself cannot give 1 Mig29 for indigeneous developments? (@BhaskarTrivedi8)

@BhaskarTrivedi8 because they get paid a lot of money. Kaveri high-altitude testing was done on a IL-76 testbed at Gromov. (@SJha1618)

deejay wrote:
saumitra_j wrote:...

Deejay sir, from AI 2015 when I interacted with a gent from GTRE, they had completed 3K hours of static testing as well as high altitude testing on IL76. They need to complete 4K hours before they were allowed to test fly it on a twin engine jet and 5K hours before they put it on a twin engine jet. An IAF Mig29 was one of the platforms they wanted to acquire but TBH, I do not know how much time it will take from progressing from 3K hours to 4K hours. They were badly underfunded in UPA times and I just hope that they have been able to get over the funding issues. The problem of acquiring a test bed probably is more acute now given the dwindling strength of the IAF's fighter fleet
Flying test bed options in the global second hand market / used bird market at reasonable costs and decent aircraft life with all documentation available can be purchased. In fact, there is a big market for such Russian aircraft. I am sure even western options can be exercised.

Point being, IAF may stone wall such transfers and reasons maybe genuine. Alternatives can be found. I hope the funding freeze/ drip has been overcome.

Another thought, since GTRE is specialist in engine r&d, HAL needs engines, why can't HAL fund engine development at GTRE for aircraft it is going to manufacture? LCA is a basket case for such PSU funded initiative. Instead, what is happening is that HAL itself is getting into engine R&D. This has its benefits but I am trying to look at alternatives where the industry moves away from government dependencies.

This is critical because engine development programmes are long term and we may not have a favourable dispensation forever. The delinking of critical funding will be good, IMVHO.

P.S. That Sir doesn't suit me. Also makes me feel old. Hope we can do away with that.

kit · Post by **kit** » 19 Apr 2016 12:13

China recently pooled all its jet engine efforts .. why is India moving in the reverse direction ?!

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 19 Apr 2016 12:42

kit wrote:China recently pooled all its jet engine efforts .. why is India moving in the reverse direction ?!

And insanely large amounts of money being spent by China on jet engines.

India isn't moving in the reverser direction.
Sri. Parrikar mentioned that 4000-6000 Turboshaft engines will be needed by India in the near future during HTSE first run at HAL. He seems to want HAL to succeed here . That clearly shows he knows the importance of the jet engine program. Problem is that info on Kaveri and govt outlays on it is hard to come by.

The news of China spenings 10s of billions on the jet engine program, of Chinese team presence at Gromov when GTRE took kaveri there - all seem to be injected into media to jostle govt into action.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 19 Apr 2016 13:30

indranilroy wrote: I have seen nothing except newspaper reports on getting a flying test bed. I am not entirely sure if a fighter jet can become a flying test bed. The reason why an IL-76 is used as a test bed is because there is a lot of instrumentation for data collection and analysis. I don't know if there is enough room on a fighter jet for the same. It is within GTREs capability to build a flying test bed. The problem is the funding.

Jet fighter is needed to cover full flight envelope of a fighter jet. IL-76 or B747 based test beds can only cover small part of the envelope. Also you cannot test the performance with a intake duct that's there in fighter jet on those big test beds. And I am sure many other such things for which fighter jet is imperative. And since its new engine, a twin jet is must. I guess Mig-29 is because its cheap and we know it well enough. And I guess due to size similarities of RD-33 and Kaveri, integration would be easier than say if you have Su-30. Of coarse IL-76/B747 type test beds are not supplanted by mig-29 type ones. In the initial phase of testing most of the data is collected and mathematical models are fine tuned. There you will only use those big 4-engined test beds. Once basic performance is validated, you don't need all that huge number of sensors. Only a few key numbers and the fine tuned mathematical models can be used to interpolate. Anyway there are 20-30 engines used in entire testing program each with specific test goals and thus specifically instrumented. Both types of test beds are needed. Why are we not getting big flying test beds?? Can we not get one under off-set from either Russia (IL-76) or US (B747)?

indranilroy wrote:
Let me get back to you on this. There were tenders for the cores. I think Kabini core is retained in the 125 kN engine.

Can the 54kN dry thrust core be used for 125kN class engine? IMO, it will be a scaled version of kabini with dry thrust of about 80kN, if not a redesigned or total new core. (I am not sure how much is thrust rating on Kabini core alone - may be 45kN-ish, the scaled one has to have ~60kN even if we assume increased BPR for new engine) Of coarse they will infuse some latest technology to improve on thrust-to-weight ratio of the engine even if its mere up-scaled version.

member_28700 · Post by **member_28700** » 19 Apr 2016 18:09

It was clear that based on where SPs were along in their Jigs and statement by the person in-charge that SP-3 would be completed and flown by July. SP-3 was at final equipping and assembly phase while SP-4 was at coupling stage.

Can any of the gurus please comment on the production timelines for an LCA i.e. a guess by the current schedule how long the SPs are in jigs, how long for final shipping and assembly etc. I know at this stage the figures would vary a lot from what they would be a couple of years down the line but any estimates could clear the cloud as to how many LCAs could be expected in the coming years.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Apr 2016 18:57

deejay wrote:
Flying test bed options in the global second hand market / used bird market at reasonable costs and decent aircraft life with all documentation available can be purchased. In fact, there is a big market for such Russian aircraft. I am sure even western options can be exercised.

Point being, IAF may stone wall such transfers and reasons maybe genuine. Alternatives can be found. I hope the funding freeze/ drip has been overcome.

Another thought, since GTRE is specialist in engine r&d, HAL needs engines, why can't HAL fund engine development at GTRE for aircraft it is going to manufacture? LCA is a basket case for such PSU funded initiative. Instead, what is happening is that HAL itself is getting into engine R&D. This has its benefits but I am trying to look at alternatives where the industry moves away from government dependencies.

This is critical because engine development programmes are long term and we may not have a favourable dispensation forever. The delinking of critical funding will be good, IMVHO.

P.S. That Sir doesn't suit me. Also makes me feel old. Hope we can do away with that.

Engines are developed for aircraft and if we have an engine (Kaveri) that is unsuitable and too late for the Tejas, the Kaveri simply must be used in a different and perhaps new aircraft. That the Kaveri works is not in doubt - and a couple of years ago I actually had a phone call from a senior retired test pilot saying that the Kaveri has performed well in hi alt testing and that they should really put it on an aircraft an fly the damn thing

There have been statements/rumours on here that the Kaveri will go on Aura. Maybe it will and I wish the program well.

But I suspect that what lies at the heart of the tardiness is deep conservatism and an urge to be cautious to a fault. "Being cautious to a fault" is what has marked the Tejas program. One accident and the HS 748 AWACS died. A few mishaps and the IJT was declared dead and we are still not sure what is happening. The Saras has been effectively stalled indefinitely.

May I add some perspective to this, simply observing from what I see and hear
1. There are some bitter opponents of indigenous programs whose critical views of indigenous programs get great impetus from every accident or cock up - many may be paid agents of foreign companies.
2. Even among those of us who support a program like the Tejas often react with bitter criticism the minute there is a small failure in a program that is not Tejas. For example

IJT not stalling/spinning. Damn HAL should forget IJT and produce Tejas
HAL planning HT 40? HAL stupids should produce Tejas fisrt and forget pipe dreams like HTT 40
LUH ready for testing? HAL should concentrate on Tejas

Whether we like it or not HAL does get affected by criticism which is intense and in all the media to the extent that even HAL employees are looked at with disdain in some instances. I believe that an overcautious approach stems from this - knowing that the smallest failure wil be blown up. So I believe they are doing exactly what the supporters say - go very carefully forwards with Tejas and go slow on other things.

The intense scrutiny they get is not always good. So they are hardly going to pick up a Kaveri and experiment with a Tejas at this stage. And apart from a future Aura there is no ner-time hope of seeing a Kaveri fly.