LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 03 Jan 2017 18:49

Newbie here but just curious. Perhaps NLCA is not right for Carrier requirements but that should not stop Navy from using it. INS Vishal and INS Vikrant are years away from operationalization. Why can't Navy use these birds to train pilots initially and then even if they might not meet carrier requirements they can be used for shore line defense as well as limited attack role. Even if they take off from shore line (Example from Gujrat coast on west or Andamans on east) with mid air refueling they can add some punch. They can irrespective be handy in air defense role. at $30M a pop they are relatively cheaper option. It is time Navy had a much better air wing.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 03 Jan 2017 19:12

^^ Unless IN deploys NLCA in operational service, the dev loop is not complete. I mean it could be just 2 jets for that matter. But IN should deploy it on AC. A SQ placed on-shore in addition to see how sea conditions affect the design. Just making a Aircraft is not the whole deal. Much more comes when its used in real life. If we have not done it, our next jet will face issues all the same.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 04 Jan 2017 02:35

Now NLCA is only TD.

123nos LCA mk1+mk1a.

120 make in India F16/Gripen.

120 make in India twin engine F18/Rafale/FGFA.

36nos Rafale

By 2030 400nos required fighters according to MP earlier Interview+ 57nos Naval twin engine fighter.

lca mk2 doubtfull? or maybe 83nos after 2025.

Su 30 production 272nos ends in 2020.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Jan 2017 02:42

JayS wrote:The way MP has been saying these things consistently for last 3yrs, I am thinking, We *will* have both teens being bought and screw-drivered in India.

My only hope is those RFI go the MMRCA way and get delayed (sorry but I am just frustrated) until LCA Mk2 gets ready. Because if teens come, there is very slim chances LCA MK2 will be ordered at all.

Probably solah and katrina for IN if it can manage stobar. Don't think both US birds will come.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jan 2017 03:32

I actually happen to think this - AMCA instead of LCA - is good news.

Exclusive: Navy chief's saying aircraft's naval version did not meet timeline 'hurtful', says LCA Tejas director

In his first remarks after Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) Admiral Sunil Lanba yesterday rejected the under-developed naval version of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas for 'not meeting timelines' and being plagued by 'further delays', Programme Director CD Balaji, who heads the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), termed the remark 'hurtful', adding that 'it will only strengthen our resolve'.

The ADA functions under the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and consists of scientists who designed the LCA Tejas.

WHAT LCA PROGRAMME DIRECTOR SAID

Responding to Lanba's comments, he said, "We have two technology demonstrators for LCA Navy in place, which are Mk1. We were looking at Mk2 now which would be an optimised design and a necessary step in the path of design and development to any future configurations". As per those in the know, it was explained that to simply tick an aircraft off and expect to jump to the next level is impossible. "Even F35, with all the might of the multinational effort, is still evolving. There are no shortcuts. As such, developing the naval version is a much tougher ask with constraints in the runway, folding blades and operating in tougher environs as against operating from a land-based fixed runway," said a source.

Balaji also said, "We know the Raksha Mantri is with us and we are proceeding with the programme as per the government's directions. It will not affect us. I have spoken to my team and we believe that this will only strengthen our resolve".

"Once the naval version's Mk2 is ready, we will move to discussing matters on the next level and the progress of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), which is on ADA's drawing board. The navy chief's remarks are being read as a hint that the force is now only interested in the AMCA, and not Tejas anymore", he added.

The navy chief made it clear that while the force would support indigenous efforts to build a carrier-borne aircraft, the navy would for now, however, seek an aircraft 'elsewhere'. His statement is a clear indicator that the navy would go for a foreign fighter aircraft for the indigenous carrier, which is being built at Kochi presently. The INS Vikramaditya, navy's sole operational carrier, uses the Russian MiG29K aircraft.

Also read | Defence Ministry approves procurement of 83 LCA Tejas for Air Force

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, a strong votary of indigenous technology, has not reacted as yet.

WHAT DID LANBA SAY?

While the navy's unhapiness with the LCA has been evident for some time now, the chief's emphatic comments perhaps took most people by surprise. He said, "We were the first service to support the aircraft and wanted a timeline for it. The programme has not met the timeline and there are further delays. LCA Navy does not meet the navy staff requirements and thus, we need to look at an alternative aircraft to have combat capability on our aircraft carrier. We will continue to support the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in developing an indigenous carrier-based fighter. But in the meantime, we need to have combat capability on Vikramaditya and Vikrant".

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 04:16

Jay,

You and me are on the same page. And now that Parrikar has spoken, I can tell you that IN and Parrikar are on the same page as well. And should be obvious to anybody with an iota of sense. The RM has in fact thrown his weight behind Tejas. You will soon see something which will heart any jingoes heart here. Mk1A orders, Mk2, NLCA Mk2 are going forward because him. He is the best RM for the Tejas program after George Fernandez.

The only thing I would have loved Parrikar to do is secure the program safe from any perturbations of the future by putting a timeline and ordering two squadrons for the reasons that you mention.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 04 Jan 2017 04:27

Based on article above, you seem a tad optimistic regarding the fate of LCA. I'm not holding out much hope esp. In light of MPs push for single engined fighter. The best hope for lca is additional orders at foc. A bit strange and ironic that the supposed pro desi arm of the services pulled the proverbial rug.

AMCA could be another story. LCA sun setting, AMCA might be the new dawn.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 05:31

My optimism is not based on the above article

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jan 2017 08:59

Question: Has there been any info that the AMCA will feature a naval version? If there was I seem to have missed it

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jan 2017 09:16

shiv wrote:Question: Has there been any info that the AMCA will feature a naval version? If there was I seem to have missed it

Cannot recall an official statement to that effect.

Wiki has an unknown source that states IN joined the effort in 2011.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 04 Jan 2017 09:17

Business Standard learns that the navy wants ADA to develop a carrier deck version of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), an indigenous, twin-engine, fifth-generation, stealth fighter that is unlikely to enter service before 2030.

Aircraft carrier version of Tejas still alive, despite navy opposition
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2016/12/a ... still.html

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 09:30

Navy would take even a non stealthy version: a twin engined LCA. But such a plane would not pass muster with IAF. Hence, the advent of a naval AMCA.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 04 Jan 2017 09:38

India to make stealth fighter

“The concept and feasibility study for the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) has completed and submitted to the government. We are awaiting the government’s approval to develop prototype vehicles (PVs),” P.Ramachandra, director, admin and planning, Aeronautical Development Agency told this newspaper on the sidelines of the Indian Science Congress.
It is designed to be the 25-tonne class aircraft whereas the Tejas is weighing only about 10 tonnes. It will have the range of 2,800 km. “The aircraft will have many stealth features for evading radars. The weap-ons and antennas will not be visible from outside. This makes the aircraft heavy and it will have twin-engines,” he said.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 09:40

My only complaint of ADA/MoD is that they are moving way to slowly.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jan 2017 09:43

The MCA was a dual engined plane based on the LCA. They removed the vertical and introduced TVC.

The AMCA morphed into a "5th gen" plane and into the current form.

BTW, the "6th gen" planes by Boeing are rather similar to the MCA of the late 90s.

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 04 Jan 2017 09:45

It seems Lca mk2 will be dumped and full manpower of ADA will be dedicated to AMCA while HAL handles Lca mk1a with IAF purchase of 120-200nos imported make in India single engine fighter.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 04 Jan 2017 09:46

Cain Marko wrote: AMCA could be another story. LCA sun setting, AMCA might be the new dawn.

More like a false dawn.

Just about every indigenous project is shit canned before it can be mass produced in favor of expensive imports.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Jan 2017 10:00

sankum wrote:It seems Lca mk2 will be dumped and full manpower of ADA will be dedicated to AMCA while HAL handles Lca mk1a with IAF purchase of 120-200nos imported make in India single engine fighter.

From what I have read so far, they seemed to have a sequential process: LCA followed by the MCA/AMCA. At that time there was no 1A or a II.

If they focus on the II, then the AMCA gets delayed. And, that to me, is unacceptable. IMHO, in all respects, the AMCA has got to be the crown jewel of air crafts in India. I think as long as the lines do not die, the LCA has performed its function within the design cycle. Make as many 1A as needed to keep the line open, but please, from a design point of view, move on to the next step.

The teens are for the engine and fillers.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 10:33

Take it for what's worth. This is the current situation.
1. Mk1s for squadron formations, familiarizations: similar to initial batch of su-30s. These will be upgraded to MK1A standard sans internal LRU reorganization.
2. Mk1As is HAL's baby and IAF is very much into it. They are working with HAL to make it a success. MK1As are nothing to scoff at. One is looking at something very close to gripen E. It might also be qualified for carrying more payload.
3. Mk2 is gripen E equivalent and it is ADA's baby. Parrikar is fully convinced of it and has asked ADA to go full steam on it. IAF is sufficiently interested. Navy is not. But it understands that it is required for us to master the technologies required for carrier operations. So, it is supporting the process. Can ADA produce a Mk2 in time? That is the question.
4. AMCA is starting to pick up steam. However, sufficient resources have not been allotted to it. IAF and IN both want it, but funding hasn't arrived in the quantity required. Additionally is ADA ready to fly a prototype in ten years. I am not completely sold on it. But there is no other way, but to try.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 04 Jan 2017 10:55

^^10 years for td is way too long. 10 years should be the production target.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Jan 2017 11:04

So for Mk-2 they are making a naval prototype and then changing the landing gear and making it IAF version? What changes are needed to make the IAF version?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 11:05

One thing that i have contemplated is why not ADA hand over MK1A and Mk2 development to HAL and get on full fledged development of AMCA. It will be good as all turf wars can be avoided and MK1A lessons will easily flow into Mk2. But, I think there is too much pride at stake here. I don't know if someone could whisper this scheme into the RM's ear.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 11:07

Thakur_B wrote:^^10 years for td is way too long. 10 years should be the production target.

AMCA is barely out of the wind tunnel studies today. 10 years is actually optimistic.

Cybaru wrote:So for Mk-2 they are making a naval prototype and then changing the landing gear and making it IAF version? What changes are needed to make the IAF version?

Currently they are two different versions in "development" in parallel. But the movement is very slow.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 04 Jan 2017 11:11

I think the transition will happen when the Mk-2 starts flying. Then the test team (ADA,HAL,IAF) will take over and go through the cycles. The design team will be free to work on AMCA.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Jan 2017 11:36

sankum wrote:
Business Standard learns that the navy wants ADA to develop a carrier deck version of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), an indigenous, twin-engine, fifth-generation, stealth fighter that is unlikely to enter service before 2030.

Aircraft carrier version of Tejas still alive, despite navy opposition
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2016/12/a ... still.html

This is the first time I have seen something about N-AMCA. Which is a good news. Hope ADA develops N-AMCA first and strip it down for IAF version.

But as IR said, main worry is the snail's pace on AMCA or even on LCA MK2. FSED is yet to be approved for AMCA. MoD needs to pour in some serious money and increase size of ADA by 2x-3x. And they seriously need to let go this contract workforce model. This pulling resources from one project for another is not going to work.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 04 Jan 2017 22:24

Tejas inches closer to FOC; crucial trials coming up

By: By Anantha Krishnan M4 Jan 2017, 08:11 pm

Bengaluru: The Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas programme is heading towards the Final Operational Clearance (FOC) phase scheduled to be achieved by June this year. According to sources involved with the project, Derby missile will be fired in a guided mode during the first quarter of the year, clearing a key FOC parameter.
“In the air-to-air role, we have already fired the R-73 and it is the turn of Derby in guided mode now. In the air-to-ground phase, different types of bombs have already been dropped and tested. There are some software updates needed to fine-tune the accuracy of these missions,” an official told Mathrubhumi on Wednesday.

Interestingly, it was on January 4, 2001 LCA had its first flight with Wg Cdr Rajiv Kothiyal piloting the Technology Demonstrator-1. In the last 16 years, different platforms from the test flightline have completed around 3300 flights.
“If you add up the Squadron flights, the numbers will be more,” says the official. The Indian Air Force (IAF) now operates three Tejas fighters from Bengaluru.

No major hiccups in the programme

The official said that there are no major hiccups with programmes and the FOC deadlines will now be met.
“Software upgradation might happen even after FOC. We have already integrated the air-to-air-refuelling-probe on LSP-8 and it will soon undertake trials. Flight envelope checks are being done to see any variations in the aerodynamics performance,” says the official.
He said the engineers wanted to ensure that there is absolutely no influence on the air data parameters, post integration of the refuelling probe.
“First dry runs will be executed followed by wet fuel transfer. It is a complex mission,” adds the official.

The Russian gun (Gsh-23) has already been integrated on LSP-7 for the ground butt firing trials at Nasik. This will be followed by flight trials in the second quarter of the year.
The envelope expansion (8G) has already been achieved at the Bahrain International Air Show last year. The Angle of Attack (AoA) of 26 degrees has also been achieved, with the actual requirement being 24 degrees.

Tejas flypast at R-Day?

A fly-past by three-Tejas formation is likely this time during the R-Day Parade in Delhi.
According to sources, the IAF is mulling over the idea of moving away from convention of not flying single-engine fighters during R-Day Parade over Rajpath.
“Single-engine fighters did fly over Rajpath during R-Day parade many decades ago, including the Sea Harriers. This time there’s a thought process to fly the Tejas. A total of five Tejas platforms are being readied, including two from the flight test line as a stand-by. A final confirmation has to come from Air HQ,” says an official with DRDO.
During the upcoming 11th Aero India from February 14 in Bengaluru, Tejas will make its debut in Squadron colours. HAL is making all efforts to add one more fighter (SP-4) to the Squadron at the earliest.
The writer tweets @writetake)

http://english.mathrubhumi.com/mobile/n ... -1.1629819

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2017 22:38

Indranil wrote:One thing that i have contemplated is why not ADA hand over MK1A and Mk2 development to HAL and get on full fledged development of AMCA. It will be good as all turf wars can be avoided and MK1A lessons will easily flow into Mk2. But, I think there is too much pride at stake here. I don't know if someone could whisper this scheme into the RM's ear.

Can you write this in a one page article? I bolded the main themes. More like a policy paper. What are the pros and cons? And final paragraph your recommendation.

And off course proper handoff from ADA to HAL with personnel allocated as needed.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 04 Jan 2017 22:56

The RD parade flypast was supposed to be hush-hush till IAF confirmation came. Interesting to see Tarmak break the news before hand.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Jan 2017 23:55

Jingo Khush Bua...

Thats a big boost for LCA. That too IAF showing enough confidence on it despite the decades old policy against single engine jet. I m liking the pampering Tejas is receiving...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2017 23:56

KaranM, Once Derby and Astra are integrated with LCA how many AAMs can each plane carry?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 05 Jan 2017 00:05

ramana wrote:KaranM, Once Derby and Astra are integrated with LCA how many AAMs can each plane carry?

Usual air-to-air only combat load would be 4 Astra/Derby + 2 R-73 with the centerline hardpoint carrying an 800 liter drop tank.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Jan 2017 00:25

nachiket wrote:
ramana wrote:KaranM, Once Derby and Astra are integrated with LCA how many AAMs can each plane carry?
Usual air-to-air only combat load would be 4 Astra/Derby + 2 R-73 with the centerline hardpoint carrying an 800 liter drop tank.

Thanks. So AESA radar and 4 Astra/Derby will make for BVR combat and 2 R-73 for close in WVR combat?

Can you comment on the LCA avionics capabilities?
What radar, what detection, etc.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 05 Jan 2017 00:49

ramana wrote:
nachiket wrote: Usual air-to-air only combat load would be 4 Astra/Derby + 2 R-73 with the centerline hardpoint carrying an 800 liter drop tank.
Thanks. So AESA radar and 4 Astra/Derby will make for BVR combat and 2 R-73 for close in WVR combat?

Yes. But the AESA radar is supposed to be integrated with the Mk1-A and Mk2. Derby will be/already is integrated even in the Mk1 with the Elta 2032 based radar.

The configuration might be changed for longer range missions like escort with 2 drop tanks on the inboard hardpoints + 2 Derby/Astra + 2 R-73. I'm not sure if the centerline hp can carry another missile. Haven't seen pics of such a config. But I don't see why not.

Can you comment on the LCA avionics capabilities?
What radar, what detection, etc.

Will let Karan comment about that. There was a discussion about the Elta 2052 capabilities earlier. I don't remember if it was this thread or another one. Range is likely to be more than sufficient assuming they select the 2052.

A personal doubt I had was about the cooling requirements of the 2052 and how the Mk-1A with the F404 engine will cope. The LCA has a roomy nose for an aircraft its size. Hope they can take full advantage of it in terms of the number of T/R modules.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 05 Jan 2017 01:12

JayS wrote:Jingo Khush Bua...

Thats a big boost for LCA. That too IAF showing enough confidence on it despite the decades old policy against single engine jet. I m liking the pampering Tejas is receiving...

It is at the RM's behest. IAF clearance has still not come. But preparations are quite forward. I heard that it will be a 5 plane flypast including the three SPs. However, I wish AK had not spoken till the official word came out.

Anyways,as I have been saying, "RM is pushing". If HAL and ADA could pull up their socks, we will see Tejas Mk1A and Mk2. There are hurdles:
1. HAL is a DPSU.
2. HAL has next to no design experience.
3. ADA has next to no manufacturing experience.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 05 Jan 2017 07:04

NRao wrote: If they focus on the II, then the AMCA gets delayed. And, that to me, is unacceptable. IMHO, in all respects, the AMCA has got to be the crown jewel of air crafts in India.

Sorry i don't agree. The huge expense on the F-35 did not yield any major technological breakthroughs despite its claim to being a 5th gen aircraft. There is a rather weak case for spending tons of money for what is largely a 4+ gen aircraft covered with an angled surface airframe.

Rather than rushing into the AMCA and doing a bullshit job of it, they should take the time to do it right.
There is not yet a convincing case for migrating from 4 or 4+ gen aircraft to 5th gen given the expense involved.

What building the MK2 does is buy time for them to build the AMCA properly. It also gives time for real 5th gen technologies to emerge rather than what Russia is peddling on its PAK-FA which is mostly 4th gen technology.

A lot of the technologies developed for the AMCA can go straight into the MK2 - which really raises the question why to even rush into producing the AMCA.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 Jan 2017 07:26

Neshant wrote:..

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5098&p=2097407#p2097407

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 05 Jan 2017 09:33

Indranil wrote:3. Mk2 is gripen E equivalent and it is ADA's baby. Parrikar is fully convinced of it and has asked ADA to go full steam on it. IAF is sufficiently interested. Navy is not. But it understands that it is required for us to master the technologies required for carrier operations. So, it is supporting the process. Can ADA produce a Mk2 in time? That is the question.

But what is the point? The MK1A seems nearly as good except for less payload. I doubt thrust difference will be anything but marginal considering the increased weight. Might as well order more Mk1A. And then there is the F-16.

With a changing threat scenario (PLAAF/PLAN 5G designs), wouldn't it be much better to concentrate limited development resources on AMCA? A naval version first and then an IAF version.

Keeping in mind the Aatre report and YI Patel's summary, seems like IAF Orbat is going to be mighty interesting in 10-15 years. We are looking at:

272 MKI
123 LCA
126 MII Light
126 MII Medium
36+ Rafale
50 M2k
60 MiG-29
126 FGFA

That is a lot of numbers and varieties ~ 50 sqds worth. Can they fit in the LCA mk2 and AMCA as well into that mix?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Jan 2017 09:55

CM,

It may help if you can add when these planes start being phased out. Especially the MKI and the -29. I guess the M2Ks are being upgraded and will last a lot longer(?)

And, why no AMCA?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 05 Jan 2017 10:09

I didn't count the AMCA because I listed this as circa 2030 scenario. AMCA is unlikely to be available before that, probably 2035 is more realistic based on AM Rajkumar's estimate - 10 years till prototypes and 10 years from then for production variants. So, AMCA will start coming in to replace Jags/fulcrums/Mirages ~ 250 units (unless there are delays and a number of these slots are taken up by Rafale/MII Medium).

272 MKI - phase out starts post 2040 (is yet to have MLU, expect another 20 years after)
123 LCA - CIP and phase out starts post 2060
126 MII Light - MLU 2040, phase out starts post 2060
126 MII Medium - MLU - 2040, phase out starts post 2060
36+ Rafale - MLU - 2040, phase out starts 2060
50 M2k - phase out starts after 2035, MLUs will continue past 2021
60 MiG-29 - phase out starts around 2030 considering MLUs are still coming in
126 FGFA

Oh, and I forgot the Jags, which may have an engine upgrage along with the Darin III - 120 numbers (phase out post 2035)

So, we are looking at over 1000 fighters around 2030-35, 90+% of which will be 4Gen aircraft. The Chinese are likely to have a number of 5G birds flying by then. And the more we dilly dally with the AMCA, the more we become dependent on the FGFA/Russia. Need to look past LCA Mk2 and start moving on to AMCA imvho - there is no point in trying to induct a 4Gen bird, no matter how good it is, as a replacement for MIrages, MiG-29s and Jaguars.

I think you are right - AMCA is going to have to be the crown jewel. I wonder though if they can simply skip the single engined MII fighter and make more room for the LCA (foc and Mk1A) - this 123 number is woeful, need to bring it up somehow.. For the strategic partnership and aero-industry need, stick to the twin engined MRCA - shornet/Rafale. Ensure appropriate levels of strategic exchanges are made and the AMCA is properly set up as a follow on. If desperately needed, buy few Rafale/Shornet as interim purchases for IAF shortfall in the near term. Will still be cheaper than trying for both F-16, and F-18 (plus the Rafale).

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 05 Jan 2017 11:09

Projections aside, do we really have the money to include 126 MII Light + 126 MII Medium? That is a big big number. And even with offset/MII/whatever that is a hefty bill. We had to scrounge around for $10bn+ for the Rafales and even that was tough. Unless the medium contract has a navy addition bringing in more economies of scale.