LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

[member_28990]

i have multiple Goan friends of different backgrounds who all swear by Parrikar's no nonsense work ethic and simplicity. He is very popular in goa.

[kapilrdave]

I've personally flown with MP in ECONOMY class . At that time he was CM of Goa and the person sitting beside him didn't know he is a CM of a state. During their exchange the person came to know about it and he was like . He stood up and introduced MP to everyone in the flight. MP stood up and said let's not make a big deal about it as he's just a common man like everyone else.

When we landed in Delhi there were only two lowly chaps came to receive him in a personal car. He didn't carry any security at all with him. Later I came to know that he roams around in Goa on his Honda Activa .

I hope he has good security now.

[Bhaskar_T]

Some time back, there were posts/images/articles which described the state of art LCA Paint Hanger (recently inaugurated by Arup Raha on the day of his first flight on Tejas). Anantha Krishnan or somebody also posted the pics of technicians posing in the hanger. (Or was it an article in Vayu or in video by a defence reporter).

If I recall correctly, it was claimed that the state of art painting assembly would be able to paint 1 LCA in 10 days. Is this true? If yes, then is it not too long?

(Commercial aircrafts, much much bigger in area probably take less than 2 weeks by Airbus/Boeing)

Edited later - Changed 15 days to 10 days. Here is the link, watch from 14:40.

[shiv]

Some time back, there were posts/images/articles which described the state of art LCA Paint Hanger (recently inaugurated by Arup Raha on the day of his first flight on Tejas). Anantha Krishnan or somebody also posted the pics of technicians posing in the hanger. (Or was it an article in Vayu or in video by a defence reporter).

If I recall correctly, it was claimed that the state of art painting assembly would be able to paint 1 LCA in 15 days. Is this true? If yes, then is it not too long?

(Commercial aircrafts, much much bigger in area probably take less than 2 weeks by Airbus/Boeing)

Please locate the original link and post. Thanks

[kit]

Thanks keshavchandra, sivab.

Really love the simplicity & sheer determination of this guy!

I simply love the way he is able to reel off the names of all projects from missiles to guns to airplanes including the timelines of various projects/inductions..

At 19.42 when he says "it is much much better than Mig21, may be 2times or 3times better" and at 14.26 when he says "Dhanush is 155*45 caliber, Bofors was 155*39 caliber" I had tears in my eyes.. Twice in the same intervview I had tears of joy.. For RM to give such an emphatic backing to Tejas and for him to remember the technical details in such minute details had me jumping for joy..

wow ..!! wonder how many of our erst while def ministers could reel off data like that !!! .. he will definitely leave a legacy !! .. As an Indian mighty proud of him !

[SaiK]

Yes, a fantastic interview by Parrikar... The BJP is brimming with future PM candidates!!!

He wanted to wrap it up fast and go back to Goa per few month back news. I hope he changes that view

[Bhaskar_T]

Please locate the original link and post. Thanks

Updated my original post with the youtube link.

[disha]

If I recall correctly, it was claimed that the state of art painting assembly would be able to paint 1 LCA in 10 days. Is this true? If yes, then is it not too long?

(Commercial aircrafts, much much bigger in area probably take less than 2 weeks by Airbus/Boeing)

Define fast?

Define Size?

Define Type?

One cannot x-compare one aircraft type with another. One is a military and another is civilian. One may require 5 coats of paint and another may require just 2 coats. The former (millitary) may require a longer curation time. The later (commercial) can do with a shorter curation time. One cannot use commercial (white/bright) paint/scheme on a fighter plane meant for low visibility.

Size is not necessarily what you see., size is the total surface area of what you actually paint. A small fighter may have more surface areas to paint than a commercial plane.

We cannot compare Boeing paints in 1 hour and we take 24 hours for small LCA. That is not comparison since you are comparing a water melon to a grape. Yes both are fruits and the comparison stops there.

It is easy to do equivalence., and since it is easy - humans tend to fall into the false equivalence trap.

[shiv]

Please locate the original link and post. Thanks

Updated my original post with the youtube link.

Thanks. It occurs to me that my entire house gets painted in 4-5 days days and I think the surface area inside and outside is more than Tejas and rivals a Boeing 737 at least. Can't see why Boeing painting is so slow. Cars are painted in a few hours and dozens are painted in a day - in processes that make Boeing and Airbus plants look slow. On the other hand Da Vinci took 4 years to paint the Mona Lisa

But if I am asked to take a guess it probably depends on the type of paint and curing time rather than the surface area. You know cars are painted in a few minutes by dipping them in paint but planes must require specific conditions. The other thing is what we don't know about - the LCA requires paint that can be exposed to speeds in excess of Mach 1 - which no civilian airliner currently flying needs. And then there was news years ago of stealth (radar absorbent) paint used on Indian jaguars - and possibly similar stuff might be used on the Tejas - I don't know.

The LCA is expected to reach speeds in excess of Mach 1 at sea level in Indian conditions - which would translate to very high skin temperatures compared with an airliner flying at 40,000 feet and Mach 0.9 with outside temp of -50 deg C. The paint job needs to have something different.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

Dear All Maulaners, Allow me to butt in with my 2 cents. I don't paint aircraft on my weekends but over a 15 year period of exploration have more knowledge in this field than most mango abduls.
1) Comparing houses/ cars to painting an aircraft is like saying I can do a C-section and take out a baby in 20 mins so why does the Mom need 9 month + to produce one.
2) It's not a question of size, but more of intercoat drying times which actually slow down this job.

So please no rona-dhona and dhoti shiverring on how poor SDRE's are f***ing up the Yeel-See-Yay

P.S. Added later: As my family doctor used to say when we got the flu- "You can take medicene and it will cure you in 1 week, or skip medicene and get well in 7 days. Choice is yours"

[Karan M]

Also, if the LCA painting includes any RAM treatment, that would require extra care and effort.

[suryag]

ADA/HAL guys are good for nothing elsewhere under the burqa solution to a similar problem was suggested by Ajit.d garu

@Saik garu. Please hire a painter for 1.5 days, ask him to mix white cement with Super Latex (waterproof solution from Pidilite) or any such solution and paint your roof. I live in the top floor and this is quite effective in Chennai heat. You would require approx 30 Kgs of white cement for double coating a 1100 Sq ft roof area. Superlatex is required only for the base coat and will water proof the roof. The white cement acts as an insulator and reflects the radiative heat off the roof. Work duration - approx 1 hr for initial cleaning and prep of roof, for 6 hrs for first coat and 4 hours for next coat. Matl cost - Rs. 1000. Labor cost- Rs 1200

This will last for 2-3 years easily.

Now what is sauce for chennai heat is sauce for tejas too and apparently the duration of work is only 1.5 days

[disha]

^ You will get a super shiny LCA! Yaaaaaay! :ROFL:

[rahulm]

MP is no ordinary pollie. He is an IIT Material Science chap who understands numbers and stuff like that.

Since, he understands Material Science, I expect him to appreciate our current limitations and significance for our future. Probably, will understand Kaveri SCB issues better than anybody else who is in a position to actually do something about it.

Am also expecting him to show show the same leadership in addressing concerns of all stakeholders for Arjun as he did for Tejas.

The one other thing I hope he does is invest in creating prime mover capabilities for all our needs. This is one area where do have not done well so far.

He is highly regarded in Goa and during his term was easily accessible to aam junta types.

[ramana]

Bhaskar-t had a valid question as to why it takes x number of days for the LCA to be painted. And he gave commercial aircraft example.

Mukesh answered as the coats have to dry and most likely buffed for next coat.

We all learn.

[shiv]

Bhaskar-t had a valid question as to why it takes x number of days for the LCA to be painted. And he gave commercial aircraft example.

Mukesh answered as the coats have to dry and most likely buffed for next coat.

We all learn.

True ramana, but to be fair to all, let me post his actual question as originally posted

Some time back, there were posts/images/articles which described the state of art LCA Paint Hanger (recently inaugurated by Arup Raha on the day of his first flight on Tejas). Anantha Krishnan or somebody also posted the pics of technicians posing in the hanger. (Or was it an article in Vayu or in video by a defence reporter).

If I recall correctly, it was claimed that the state of art painting assembly would be able to paint 1 LCA in 15 days. Is this true? If yes, then is it not too long?

(Commercial aircrafts, much much bigger in area probably take less than 2 weeks by Airbus/Boeing)

His question was not why it takes so long, but why it takes "too long" for the LCA while planes with bigger surface areas are painted in slightly longer periods.

I found the wording of the question mystifying.

The LCA takes less than 10 days. Boeing Airbus take more than 10 days. The smaller aircraft takes less time to paint then the bigger aircraft. What is the question then?

The meaning of the question appears to be that the painting of the LCA is too slow and that others do it much faster. The thrust of the question is that the time taken is "too long". That is an insinuation worded as a question. That explains the reactions that we see. It is perfectly valid to ask him why he says "too long" given that the smaller LCA is painted in less time than the bigger Boeing. But note that he edited the post where he had actually posted misinformation that the LCA takes longer than the Boeing until I requested him to produce the actual link. After checking the original link he edited his post. The original post contained a series of vague references ending with the conclusion that the LCA takes 15 days to paint - longer than Boeing or Airbus. Many people saw the original question before he edited it and were upset at the misinformation AND insinuation minus any reference to source of information. Like the rest of us the person who asks the question must also learn.

[Kersi D]

Updated my original post with the youtube link.

Thanks. It occurs to me that my entire house gets painted in 4-5 days days and I think the surface area inside and outside is more than Tejas and rivals a Boeing 737 at least. Can't see why Boeing painting is so slow. Cars are painted in a few hours and dozens are painted in a day - in processes that make Boeing and Airbus plants look slow. On the other hand Da Vinci took 4 years to paint the Mona Lisa

But if I am asked to take a guess it probably depends on the type of paint and curing time rather than the surface area. You know cars are painted in a few minutes by dipping them in paint but planes must require specific conditions. The other thing is what we don't know about - the LCA requires paint that can be exposed to speeds in excess of Mach 1 - which no civilian airliner currently flying needs. And then there was news years ago of stealth (radar absorbent) paint used on Indian jaguars - and possibly similar stuff might be used on the Tejas - I don't know.

The LCA is expected to reach speeds in excess of Mach 1 at sea level in Indian conditions - which would translate to very high skin temperatures compared with an airliner flying at 40,000 feet and Mach 0.9 with outside temp of -50 deg C. The paint job needs to have something different.

Shiv. Painting is a specialised job, let us leave it to the specialists. To the best of my knowledge cars are not painted by dipping in paints.

The MOST important aspect of painting is pre-treatment. Cars undergo several, 4 - 8 stages of pre-treatment by dipping in mild acid, mild alkali etc with water wash between each stage. Then there will be a primer coat whic protects the metal against corrosion, this would be elecctro-phoretic painting. Then you have top coat for aesthetics as well as scratch resistant. Then there would be baking with a certain residence time at certain temperatures. I believe that a large amount of painting, in auto industry, is done with robots.

Just sharing my 2 yuan !!!

[Indranil]

I had read a piece of news sometime back about how a St. Louis facility had cut back the time to paint an F-18 from 6 to 5 days. Can't find it now.

Frankly, it is all a matter of technology and know how. We do lag behind in the level of automation. This doesn't really bear an effect on the timeline, as 1 plane per 15 days is a greater rate than the planned 16 planes per year. But it does have a bearing on the quality of the process, amount of paint used, cost etc.

[shiv]

My only contention is the curious fact that any new data about an Indian entity is automatically assumed to be somewhat less than some foreign entities that we are all so well informed about. Why is it good for people to express such views on this forum while it is wrong for the Air Force to hold exactly the same view - i.e that the Indian entity is somewhat lower placed in the scheme of things than foreign ones?

Either we stand up and be counted as staunch supporters of Indian goods or we stop accusing the armed forces for having the same views of inferiority of the Indian that we allow here as informed opinion.

[Bhaskar_T]

Disha, Shiv and all others - Thanks for your responses. As Ramanna_brf hints, important is learning (and I ain't a BDutt with agenda "Bash SDRE's Yal-See-Eey")

Well, I like the arguments posted that a military aircraft requires more pre-work, more number of coats (thickness of paint layer), higher inter-coat/curation drying times (ref. Mukesh.Kumar), special coatings (RAM? - ref KaranM) etc. but I was specifically looking for precise answers (happy with the possible arguments) that are indeed responsible for 10 days taken for painting, say what are the top 2 contributors of this 10 day process! In the posted video, one would note that the officer explaining the various stages of LCA production assembly mentions that this "Painter Hanger" facility is one of its own in the country (explains why it is called state of the art) and also mentions that it has several other nice features such as "Humidity Control", "Temperature Control" etc. Possibly such operating conditions while painting are very much required to achieve the desired the quality of painting on the LCA. Hence, the conclusion I hear is that the quality requirements of painting for military aircraft are very high than the commercial aircraft with the above posted reasons. (Surface area is definitely not the topmost reason, see below.) (I normally like to hear the specific reasons because by the logic of higher quality required for military than commercial, most of the questions are answered, hence listening to reasons helps.)

Now, may I come back to the comment that a military aircraft may have more surface area to paint than a commercial plane - this is less likely. The dimensions below are for Length X Span X Height in meters & it tells that every dimension is at least 5 times smaller than a commercial jetliner. Reason, I pick A380 is that its one of the largest commercial jetliner but most importantly it takes 10 days to be painted, similar to Tejas. I saw some references online where some F-16's would take number of days/weeks but the answers have long range. It would be good if we can find how much time say F-16, F-18, Mig-29, SU30-MKI take for painting for comparison.

LCA - 13.2 X 8.2 X 4.0 (x Coats, xxxx square meters, xxxx liters/xxxx kilos, 10 days by xx people)
Airbus A380 - 73.0 X 79.8 X 24.1 (3 Coats, 3100 square meters, 3600 liters/3500 kilos, 10 days by 30 people)

(Dimensions are in meters where,
LCA dimensions from - Tejas.Gov.In 2015 Brochure, http://www.tejas.gov.in/ADA-Tejas%20Brochure-2015.pdf
A380 dimenstions from - http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft ... it=COMPARE

Areas, Time & Liters/Kilos of paint required where,
2 weeks for A380, 3600 litres, - https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/how- ... nt-hangar/
10 days for A380, 3500 kilos - http://www.techly.com.au/2014/08/22/800 ... 0-80-days/ )

PS - The references to "Human", "Cars", "Houses", "Mona Lisa" are

Size is not necessarily what you see., size is the total surface area of what you actually paint. A small fighter may have more surface areas to paint than a commercial plane.

But if I am asked to take a guess it probably depends on the type of paint and curing time rather than the surface area. You know cars are painted in a few minutes by dipping them in paint but planes must require specific conditions. The other thing is what we don't know about - the LCA requires paint that can be exposed to speeds in excess of Mach 1 - which no civilian airliner currently flying needs. And then there was news years ago of stealth (radar absorbent) paint used on Indian jaguars - and possibly similar stuff might be used on the Tejas - I don't know.

The LCA is expected to reach speeds in excess of Mach 1 at sea level in Indian conditions - which would translate to very high skin temperatures compared with an airliner flying at 40,000 feet and Mach 0.9 with outside temp of -50 deg C. The paint job needs to have something different.

[Bhaskar_T]

Shiv - So Long or Too Long. 10 Days or 15 Days or 2 Weeks. It doesn't matter to me. Simply put, depending on the links you check (please see my previous post where A380 has 2 references for 10 days and 2 weeks painting required), these are the numbers LCA and A380 requires. And as you, others picked up that despite huge differences in the surface areas to be painted (including number of coats), the question was why LCA requires similar (few days longer or shorter is not my point) number of days of painting vs commercial airliner (say A380)?

The original post did use words like "probably", "If I recall correctly", "Is this true" etc. Thanks for asking the links and I corrected 15 days to 10 days for LCA. In my just posted post, the references for 10-15 days for A380 are posted as well. Hence, similar number of days are required for both. May be I should have gathered all the data first and then should have put the question - something which I will try in my future posts. Am happy that few others picked the intent behind the question.

PS - Edited Is to Was.

Bhaskar-t had a valid question as to why it takes x number of days for the LCA to be painted. And he gave commercial aircraft example.

Mukesh answered as the coats have to dry and most likely buffed for next coat.

We all learn.

True ramana, but to be fair to all, let me post his actual question as originally posted

Some time back, there were posts/images/articles which described the state of art LCA Paint Hanger (recently inaugurated by Arup Raha on the day of his first flight on Tejas). Anantha Krishnan or somebody also posted the pics of technicians posing in the hanger. (Or was it an article in Vayu or in video by a defence reporter).

If I recall correctly, it was claimed that the state of art painting assembly would be able to paint 1 LCA in 15 days. Is this true? If yes, then is it not too long?

(Commercial aircrafts, much much bigger in area probably take less than 2 weeks by Airbus/Boeing)

His question was not why it takes so long, but why it takes "too long" for the LCA while planes with bigger surface areas are painted in slightly longer periods.

I found the wording of the question mystifying.

The LCA takes less than 10 days. Boeing Airbus take more than 10 days. The smaller aircraft takes less time to paint then the bigger aircraft. What is the question then?

The meaning of the question appears to be that the painting of the LCA is too slow and that others do it much faster. The thrust of the question is that the time taken is "too long". That is an insinuation worded as a question. That explains the reactions that we see. It is perfectly valid to ask him why he says "too long" given that the smaller LCA is painted in less time than the bigger Boeing. But note that he edited the post where he had actually posted misinformation that the LCA takes longer than the Boeing until I requested him to produce the actual link. After checking the original link he edited his post. The original post contained a series of vague references ending with the conclusion that the LCA takes 15 days to paint - longer than Boeing or Airbus. Many people saw the original question before he edited it and were upset at the misinformation AND insinuation minus any reference to source of information. Like the rest of us the person who asks the question must also learn.

[shiv]

Shiv - So Long or Too Long. 10 Days or 15 Days or 2 Weeks. It doesn't matter to me.

My thoughts when I see a question like this relates to the deep knowledge we educated people have about things in the west and how we are instantly able to recall how something we see in India compares with something in the West. That is what you have done and so have others at various times.

This is explained as a process of learning for all of us. I too would like to learn why every statement made by an Indian needs to be compared with the West. We are constantly engaged in "Whose is bigger" game in which India is never bigger than the West except in shameful stuff. We have more people defecating in the open. We have added 12 million people who work as slaves in the last one year. And in the field of aviation where the one thing we might be facetious enough to actually feel some pride - we are reminded constantly that it is 35 years late. And then someone points out that there is a state of the art painting hangar and some patriot asks if the time of painting is not "too long" because he already knows from his general knowledge that Airbus and Boeing do it faster. OK let us say nothing wrong. We must accept constructive criticism. LCA is 35 years late. The painting does take too long. 10 LCA days versus 14 Boeing days. Fair enough. We have learned that we continue to be behind the best and we are all in full agreement with the west that western standards are the best. This is part of our learning. We continue to learn that every day.

But what if the IAF points out all these same flaws that we intelligent educated patriots point out in the process of learning? Why should people from the IAF be specially criticized for pointing out that what happens abroad is superior/better/faster than the Indian equivalent? Why should we force the IAF to swallow equipment that we know does not come from the stables of the best.

There is a double standard in the way we view our people and our products and those double standards are linked closely with the sources of our knowledge. We are all learners and we learn what we see and read, We see and read about standards in India and in the West and it does not even take us a minute to recognize that Indian standards are lower. We retain the facts in our heads - to quote the comparison instantly. And we tell ourselves that this is part of our learning and education and intelligence. But why should IAF officers not show the intelligence and learning that we have? Why should they accept the lower standards that we can point out in a moment? The next time an IAF officer curses the LCA we need to have some empathy with him. He has also shown the learning that we have. He can also, in a moment, recognize that our standards are lower. Why should we accuse the IAF officer of brochuritis, but call our attitudes as knowledge? If what the IAF officer says is brochuritis, or love of imports. How does our instant comparative judgment of Indian with Western things qualify as thirst for learning and not brochuritis or a preference for imports?

[Bhaskar_T]

All - While trying to find the latest news on Tejas Mk2, to understand the status of Tejas Mk2, I could only find the below article dated 20th Feb 2016.

IBTimes quoted (20th Feb 2016) DRDO Chief saying that Mk2 will be available by 2017. Any idea, whether he meant that the assembling of first prototype will start by 2017 with prototype flying from 2024 OR did he mean that the Tejas Mk2 first prototype will be available by 2017? IBTimes actually refer to an interview given by DRDO Chief to Vayu Aerospace and Defence Review. Am impressed and happy that all the subscriptions of Vayu from Jan-Feb 2005 to Jan-Feb 2016 are available for download here (http://www.vayuaerospace.in/Archive.htm) but couldn't find any quote of Mk2 in the Jan-Feb 2016.

PS - Found later that the full issue of Vayu is not available, there are gaps between pages.

LCA Tejas Mk 2 testing by 2017: DRDO chief

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/lca-tejas-mk-2 ... ief-667693

Given that the LCA Tejas' indigenous development program has been marred by delays, the most advanced among the variants, the Mk 2 (also Mk. II) version, will take years before it can be seen taking off the HAL airport for testing.

The LCA Tejas Mk 2 will be available for testing by 2017 and will not be ready before 2024, INN reported, citing DRDO chief Dr S Christoper's statements to Vayu Aerospace and Defence Review.

The DRDO chief, however, confirmed that the proposed LCA Tejas Mk 2 will be using the powerful General Electric F414-GE-INS6 engines and will feature a lengthier fuselage. But there was no clarification by him if this he was talking about the Air Force or the Navy variant of the MK 2 aircraft.

IHS Jane's 360 had earlier reported, citing official sources, that the HAL had proposed the Indian Air Force (IAF) of acquiring LCA Tejas Mk 1A variant instead of waiting for LCA Tejas Mk 2 aircraft, as a stop gap arrangement. Currently, the IAF is on board to acquire LCA Tejas Mk 1A.

The report noted the lack of clarity on the IAF's participation with LCA Tejas Mk 2, given the recent statement by Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha to the media: "As of now we are not interested in Mk 2."

The Indian Navy has expressed its requirement for a naval variant of LCA Tejas Mk 2. The LCA Tejas Mk 2 version will also be featuring active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar from Israeli firm ELTA Systems.

[Bhaskar_T]

Shiv - I have gone through your latest response, need time to reflect on it and may respond later.

[sankum]

Why India is replacing Russian R-73 Close combat air-to-air missile with Israeli Python-5 on LCA-Tejas

[Gyan]

We need to wish Parikkar and our nation well. One term, one Parikkar will not be enough because the system is much bigger than the individual.

Even Parikkar can be checkmated by the system. For example there may be a single bad egg in the air force and 2-3 bad eggs in the MoD especially if they all coordinate their actions. Assume that the Air Force bad egg gets to make money from an import deal. if he is in a position of influence he can use his friends and channels to play up an import and play down the value of something that could be produced locally. He also tells his other kickback-gettng MoD friends that some deal needs to be scuttled.

What happens is that if some deal goes up to minister and he okays it, some babu will point out that the deal must go through environment ministry, or finance ministry or labour ministry or minorities ministry because Adivasi land is involved. The babu will then contact his friends in those ministries ad explain that this is a problem deal because Def minister may be getting a kickback and it needs to be scrutinized for environment/land/finance etc. So the papers for the deal keep on circulating in the government and even defence minister has to wait because he cannot make the paper move in the environment ministry.

With the government full of babus who are corrupt and Lutyens Delhi full of socialites who hobnob with rich middlemen who can influence babus and some senior officers - one honest minister is not enough.

There are always two sides to a story. if we assume that Antony was really honest we can explain why nothing went forward. Everything was corrupt and the only way he could delay the corrupt was by not making a decision. Parikkar has an even tougher job because he has to make things move despite endemic corruption and yet reduce the kickbacks that are undoubtedly still taking place and reduce the resistance to make in India that comes from foreign middlemen paying Indians to delay competing deals.

I get the general feeling that Modi and Parikkar have colluded to bypass the amount of slush money that would have been earned by the Rafale deal by first cutting the number from 126 to 36 and then delaying with intense bargaining for so long that the corrupt Indian babus and other middlemen who have money being paid will not be able to show results for getting the deal through. In the meantime I have heard Parikkar making a statement that no one seems to have commented upon. He said "In some cases in war missiles can be used instead of aircraft". It may have been coincidence but the Air Force tested a Brahmos within a few days of that statement

In other words what Parikkar and Modi may be doing is what the Chinese did when faced with sanctions. They relied on "strategic weapons" while they funded and encouraged local industry. In those days we used to laugh with our western democracy "friends" as Chinese rust buckets. Those friends are the ones paying Indians bribes now.

The time has come for us to encourage our rust bucket makers to buck up. The Chinese were lucky because of sanctions. Because we have no peacetime sanctions - it allows corrupt government officials and middlemen to flourish. Long delays help to make those corrupt people's actions ineffective - but there will be howls that our defence is going to dogs.

Note:- Very few persons have noted that Parrikar stated in his TV interview (link available on BRF) that an equipment sought to be imported for Rs. 1000 crore was converted to Make in India for only Rs 200 crore.

[Bhaskar_T]

Can I ask how much money to replace 14 aging MIG squadrons has been kept aside? (Similar to Rafale deal, is there a cost of 10-20 Billion$ floating around)

How much worth order for 40 Tejas been given to HAL by IAF? (20-IOC1, 20-IOC2/FOC)

[SaiK]

Why India is replacing Russian R-73 Close combat air-to-air missile with Israeli Python-5 on LCA-Tejas

sheer BS analysis. why would not anyone charge high for forcibly interfacing with firang weapon systems when it affects their sales? any stores integration exercise is bound to such costs. as if cost to integrate with israeli systems is cheap.

well heck.. it is idrw.

[DexterM]

Can I ask how much money to replace 14 aging MIG squadrons has been kept aside? (Similar to Rafale deal, is there a cost of 10-20 Billion$ floating around)

How much worth order for 40 Tejas been given to HAL by IAF? (20-IOC1, 20-IOC2/FOC)

Sure you can ask. Please do share with all of us what Mr Parrikar says.
PS: There are two replies given in Parliament in the year 2012. You can google for these statements. Both do not mention the precise amounts.

[Lalmohan]

Why India is replacing Russian R-73 Close combat air-to-air missile with Israeli Python-5 on LCA-Tejas

sheer BS analysis. why would not anyone charge high for forcibly interfacing with firang weapon systems when it affects their sales? any stores integration exercise is bound to such costs. as if cost to integrate with israeli systems is cheap.

well heck.. it is idrw.

the israeli radar is pre-configured to the israeli missile... this was mentioned some time back IIRC

[Suresh S]

Wrong thread but I am going to write a short note in reply to shiv. The number of things that are right in India vs the rest of the world is long . Sample this . every nursing home in the US has men/women on anything from 10 to sometime more than 20 different meds(not anecdote but first hand experience ) , many demented, memory loss, physical disability, abandoned by their families and just existing. Does these meds help. I say just the opposite.Now same old person( even if poor monetarily) in India living with loving children/grand children / great grand children and hardly on any meds .The love of the relatives help preserve their memory even and works much better than the meds that shiv and I spent our whole life learning about. Which existence do u prefer sir ? West is so great shiv.

[manjgu]

Wong thread..@nahata.... u may have a point but its not only about how u live as a old person but also how u spend your whole life as a infant, child, teenager, adult,old age ... both the societies have +/- ve points/ aspects. if we are a sensible people we will try to focus on whats good with the west and imbibe them. For the many examples of old people living with their children/grand children in a good loving atmosphere...there are equal no of cases where the old people are treated like crap in their homes by their children but cant leave the house as they dont have access to good medical facilities.

[chetak]

Bhaskar-t had a valid question as to why it takes x number of days for the LCA to be painted. And he gave commercial aircraft example.

Mukesh answered as the coats have to dry and most likely buffed for next coat.

We all learn.

The LCA painting like that of the Hawk is outsourced.

LCA painting is being done by Southfield and Hawk painting by Matcon.

Surface preparation and masking takes the longest time to do.

The painting of the aircraft is done in a controlled atmosphere in a separate painting facility.

smaller components are painted separately in smaller paint booths.

Painting is a special process per AS 9100 and the technicians involved need training and validation and need to keep their qualifications updated by periodic testing.

[Bhaskar_T]

Dexter and all - Thanks, I have watched some Parrikar ji interviews, I always do as much as I can, I don't recall if Parrikar ji mentioned any order worth of thousand crore rupees. Below calculations suggest that for 40 LCA's on firm order, depending on Rs. 209 Crore or Rs. 162 Crore/LCA fighter cost, the cost could be Rs. 8360 Crores (1.4 Billion$) or Rs. 6480 Crores (1.1 Billion$), respectively. The calculation is worth from cost perspective but the worth from order perspective would have told us much more. The missing cost data for sure, in below calculations is, FOC-version cost and recent budget alloted for setting up production line assembly (which I will try to find later and update this post).

1. About 2 years ago, HAL quoted (link below, authored by Ajai Shukla) 162 Crore Rs. (27 Million$) per IOC-2 aircraft.
2. I do not have any cost data of FOC standard so whether FOC version would cost 20% or 30% more than IOC-2, no idea?
3. This is cost alone (no weapons), wonder, adding up a profit element for HAL, ADA, ISRO (150 others agencies), though they do receive other grants from GOI, and/or development costs would make it even higher. Hence, Ajai Shukla wrote one more article (Feb 2014), one month later to his first one (Jan 2014) to bring up the cost of Rs. 162 Crores to 209 Crores per LCA (34.8 Million$).
4. Basis of raising Rs. 162 Crores to Rs. 209 Crores by considering,
a) Development Cost of Rs. 7965 Crores spent till 2014 on IAF version
b) Development Cost of Rs. 2432 Crores allotted for Mk2
c) Development Cost of Rs. 3650 Crores allotted for Naval version
d) 344 Tejas fighters = 294 IAF (14 Squadrons, each having 21 = 16 single-seater + 2 dual-seater + 3 war-reserve) + 50 Navy
e) Considering inflation/currency value over the time, the cost came to Rs. 209 Crores.
5. Hence, for 40 firm orders placed by IAF, a budget of Rs. 8360 Crores (40 X 209) should have been set aside but not heard from Parrikar ji or other sources (i.e. 1.4 Billion USD).

1 USD = 60 INR assumed.

HAL quoted 162 Crores, Ajai Shukla Link, Jan 2014 - http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 829_1.html

Ajai Shukla Calculated 209 Crores Link, Feb 2014 - http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 237_1.html

Can I ask how much money to replace 14 aging MIG squadrons has been kept aside? (Similar to Rafale deal, is there a cost of 10-20 Billion$ floating around)

How much worth order for 40 Tejas been given to HAL by IAF? (20-IOC1, 20-IOC2/FOC)

Sure you can ask. Please do share with all of us what Mr Parrikar says.
PS: There are two replies given in Parliament in the year 2012. You can google for these statements. Both do not mention the precise amounts.

[Cybaru]

I don't think one needs to account for development cost. That's sunk cost, the gain there is the know how developed for future projects and other benefits by using that r&d towards other projects. Don't count what's given to ADA/GTRE/HAL during dev phase.

The cost is the cost to manufacture. What will we pay HAL for producing the plane.

[Bhaskar_T]

So, V. Sridharan did indicate that for Mark-1A (Dec 2015), the cost of Rs. 162 Crores estimated in 2014, is supposed to go up to Rs. 190 Crores because of inclusion of electronic warfare suit, new radar and mid-air refueling. Hence,

StandAlone Cost for single Tejas Mk1A is - 190 Crores (32 Million$),
StandAlone Cost for 40 IOC-2/Mk1A - 40 X 190 = 7600 Crores (1.28 Billion$)

Based on Ajai Shukla calculations that including the development cost (estimated in 2014), the total cost/LCA (almost including everything except weapons) is 1.3 times the 162 Crore, i.e. 209 Crores.

Total Cost (incl. development) for single Tejas Mk1A is - 190 X 1.3 = 247 Crores (41 Million$)
Total Cost (incl. development) for 40 IOC-2/Mk1A - 40 X 247 = 9880 Crores (1.6 Billion$)

1 USD = 60 INR assumed.

Below calculations suggest that for 40 LCA's on firm order, depending on Rs. 209 Crore or Rs. 162 Crore/LCA fighter cost, the cost could be Rs. 8360 Crores (1.4 Billion$) or Rs. 6480 Crores (1.1 Billion$), respectively.

On the cost of the LCA MK-IA increasing by Rs 30 crore compared to the SP version, Sridharan said: "The cost is bound to go up when new things have to be integrated. And when some of the things include complex systems like the electronic warfare suit, new radar and mid-air refueling, it will (cost will go up)."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 165514.cms

Cybaru - Yes and No. Hence, both the costs (standalone/total (incl. development) are often calculated by management, economists, journalists etc. It helps to understand that how big is the development fraction cost vs standalone manufacture cost. This helps to compare with other country fighters when they tell us that they spent 50% on development cost which they will add to the standalone manufacture cost while they sell their fighter to us. Am sure you would know that when project wise economic calculations are done, sunk (or any and all) costs are included and they are time factored to reflect the money spent on different times.

I don't think one needs to account for development cost. That's sunk cost, the gain there is the know how developed for future projects and other benefits by using that r&d towards other projects.

The cost is the cost to manufacture.

[Cybaru]

Okay, understand what you are doing. I am still of the opinion, that the cost which should be compared, is the cost to incrementally manufacture one more unit of the same type irrespective of the design/dev/tooling costs.

The tooling line can be sold off after depreciation and depreciation gets taken off before taxes.
Design and Dev give you competitive advantage that do not have a comparable and are not accounted for when selling something. Its measurable but by different standards.

Sometimes projects don't return the initial investment and that is that. It's a loss. But if you try and add dev/design and tooling costs, you will have a hard time pricing properly and gaining any market share. Pricing is key and one has to price into the market not what we ideally want.

Having said that, before a project is started, one adds all those costs and arrives at a minimum run required to get your investment back. For eg: if they spent 20 billion dollars developing A380 and if they price the dev costs in, no one will buy those planes as they will turn out to be too expensive. So the pricing is done on cost of production, plus a percentage, and one hopes that the minimum number are produced to gain that investment back(220 odd planes for eg). Any planes produced after than number helps declare that line healthy and profitable.

In that sense, Rafale wanting 50% dev costs prices itself outside the market. I feel that anything purchased through FMS falls in the category above (cost of manufacture plus profits). In most cases the design/dev is funded by the government and not by the designing/production agency. Plus the manufacturing runs are larger and the costs amortized over a longer period of time as well, even if there are any hidden design/dev costs.

If country A is paying an upfront cost of design and development of country B without tangible benefits of not owning the IP, then that isn't a good model either. If they are tacking on R&D costs, then they have to fork out the IP as well. Otherwise you are paying goodwill as extras which most times don't make sense.

[Bhaskar_T]

Apologies to paste the test-flying status as picture here because nicely formatted, color coded cannot be easily copied-pasted (unless someone tells me how). After Bahren and Iron Fist, the status of test-flying tells that PV-5 flew 6 flights, PV-6 flew 10 flights in last 2 months.

Last year Dec 2015, 33 flights (excluding Navy) were conducted in a month by 5 planes (high due to preparation for Bahren) versus an average of 8/month now.

PS - Is it due to some fighters are dedicated and being prepared for Cobham Radome, IFR fitting, BVR firing, weight reduction tests etc. for FOC/Mk1A?

Dec 2015 - Guys in Bangalore must be having a blast: 35 flights in the last 31 days with just 5 planes flying. Seems like they have returned to flight testing with a bang!

3031th flight on 29 Dec
TD1 : 233 PV1: 245 PV3: 387 LSP1: 74 LSP3:266 LSP5: 290 TD2 : 305 PV2: 222 PV5: 116 LSP2: 314 LSP4: 182 LSP7: 152 NP1: 43 LSP8 : 156 PV6: 34 NP2: 12

2996th flight on 28 Nov
TD1 : 233 PV1: 245 PV3: 387 LSP1: 74 LSP3:257 LSP5: 290 TD2 : 305 PV2: 222 PV5: 112 LSP2: 314 LSP4: 174 LSP7: 147 NP1: 43 LSP8 : 149 PV6: 34 NP2: 10

[Bhaskar_T]

Loads of negative tone. Interesting comments in the link by people thrashing the author tone and negative opinion on LCA.

25th May 2016, The LCA’s 33-year journey far from Tejas - Deepak Kumar (opinion in Tribune)

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/commen ... 41592.html

The Tejas LCA, India's indigenously developed light combat aircraft, which continues to be under development for the last three decades, is a compromised aircraft and has only 35 per cent indigenous components. The induction schedule has been revised several times from the initial 1995 deadline.

In Sanskrit, tejas, the name given to India's indigenously developed light combat aircraft (LCA), means brilliance. On May 17, Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha announced that the Indian Air Force (IAF) would induct its first squadron of Tejas in July, while giving the thumbs up after flying its trainer version. Much as this news may seem to be “brilliant”, the fact is that this hugely delayed aircraft is yet to get its final operational clearance which is currently rescheduled for December this year. Worse, the Tejas Mark-I (Mk-I) is a heavily compromised aircraft with significantly reduced operational capability. Besides, the IAF's first Tejas squadron will comprise a mere four aircraft, that is one-fourth the normal size of a fighter squadron, which will be only high on symbolism and undoubtedly far from tejas (brilliant).

The LCA's long journey began over three decades ago in 1983 when the government sanctioned the project followed by the constituting of the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in June 1984. In October 1985, the IAF issued its list of requirements needed in the aircraft with a demand for 240 LCAs, including 20 trainers to be inducted by 1994. The LCA was supposed to replace the ageing Soviet-origin MiG-21s, the mainstay of the IAF, which were then scheduled to be phased out in the 1990s.

Incidentally, the LCA was conceived just as the IAF was retiring India's first indigenously developed fighter — the Hindustan Fighter (HF)-24, also known as Marut. The government then did not consider it worthy to upgrade and develop further variants of the HF-24 which had been conceived in 1955, designed by a reputed German aeronautical engineer (Kurt Tank), first test flown in 1961 and which later saw action in the 1971 Indo-Pak war. Instead, this aerodynamically well-designed single-seat twin-engine but under-powered ground attack aircraft was retired in 1985. The ADA thus started from scratch.

The LCA, as is the case with all major defence research and development projects, is a mind-boggling case study of delays, slippages, compromise and mismanagement (despite some hard work) that continues till date. There are two other disconcerting realities about the Tejas. First, the aircraft is far from indigenous, with only 35 per cent made in India and 65 per cent components sourced from overseas (mostly American and Israeli), making it an import-dependent aircraft. In fact, every major component starting from the engine and flight-control system to armaments is of foreign origin.

Second, the Tejas Mk-I has significant shortfalls, with 53 waivers and concessions. These shortfalls include lower engine thrust, higher weight, limited fuel capacity in the absence of drop tanks, markedly deficient self-protection jammers which limit its electronic warfare capability and the absence of Radar Warning Receivers and Counter Measures Dispensing System to name a few. Neither are there any certified trainer aircraft to train pilots. This has reduced the aircraft's operational capability and survivability, thereby limiting its operational utilisation. Although these shortcomings are expected to be overcome in the Mk-II version currently scheduled to be completed by December 2018, it could, however, take longer to complete considering the track record.

Consider the following: The LCA's first flight was originally scheduled for 1991, only to be revised to 1996, 1999 and 2000, before being first test flown in January 2001. Similarly, the induction schedule has been revised several times from the initial 1995 to 2003, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012 and now 2018 (for the Mk-II), by when 35 years would have elapsed. In the meantime, owing to the inordinate delay in the development of the LCA, the government has already spent Rs 20,000 crore for upgrading 125 Soviet-origin MiG-21 Bis and 62 MiG-29 fighters, 61 British-origin Jaguar strike aircraft and the French Mirage-2000 even as the IAF's squadron strength has fallen from the sanctioned 42 to 33, with all MiG-23, MiG-25 and several MiG-21 squadrons having been retired.

There are several reasons behind the delay of the LCA. Apart from a period of post-May 1998 nuclear test sanctions, among the most notable has been India's inability to develop several key components which has necessitated design changes and purchases from overseas. This includes the failure to develop the Kaveri engine (started in 1989 with unending deadline revision to 1996, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2012 and currently unknown along with a cost escalation from the original Rs 383 crore to Rs 2,839 crore as of December 2009). This has necessitated a design modification each in the Mk-I variant for the American General Electric F-404 engine and in Mk-II for the F-414 engine.

The ADA was unable to develop the Multi-Mode Radar for tracking multiple targets (original deadline December 1997, with a deal for co-development with Israel finally signed in June 2009), the Flight Control System Actuators (currently American), Radome (British) and the Multi-Functional Display System (Israeli), among several other critical items. The IAF too ended up causing a delay of over seven years because it wanted changes in the armament: the Israeli R 73E close combat missile instead of the R-60; integration of the Israeli Derby and Python-5 beyond visual range missile; addition of the Russian 500 kg M-62 bombs; and a Counter Measures Dispensing System. Some of these features and armaments are yet to be incorporated in the Mk-I.

One hopes that the Tejas will not meet the same fate as that of the import-dependent “indigenous” Arjun tank which was conceived over four decades ago in 1974. Only 124 of the Arjun Mk-I are in service, while the Army still awaits the Mk-II. Clearly, the ADA with its 152 work centres engaged in developing the LCA needs to put in more tejas (brilliance) in developing the Tejas.

[Karan M]

^^ Lifafa journalism at its best. Looks like the behinds of various folks are burning the more Tejas are ordered, hence deepak kumars have to emerge with BS claims of cooked up indigenization etc deliberately ignoring recent reports, make claims on everything is american, israeli etc.