LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

[Karan M]

For Sea Harrier, I know the officer who managed LUSH. He is a Rear Admiral now. The British were planning to retire the Harrier, had zero interest, and and told us we may do as we wish. We had reached out to them for Pegasus engine spares and possible upgrades, not Radar & AAM.

Same for the Jaguar.

have to dig out the quote (not that it matters) but we were very interested in the Vixen and AMRAAM combo, which of course went nowhere because AMRAAM was sanctioned.

still think the LUSH was underrated & wish the airframe had kept pace, because the datalink also allowed network centric targeting, something the LCA likely has. it too has virtually the same avionics and missile combination, and a couple of references mention an israeli datalink on the aircraft.

when i asked about LUSH and how hard it was to integrate the datalink, the gentleman in charge of the upgrade, pinched his fingers and said, it was a "card added to the avionics bay" implying they just replaced & upgraded the radio.

[Karan M]

I can't believe that there are guys still dinging the Tejas AFTER it has entered service and with just a few points to go before FOC is achieved.

Please focus on the capabilities of the Mk1, Mk1A, Mk2, N-LCA Mk2 and keep discussions healthy ! There is an Aero India going on for God's sake and this is the best time to get the most info out on these variants !!

+1

its also very disappointing that aero india tech sessions are not being streamed live anymore.

not many updates this time around too.

[disha]

Shiv Saar,

For a 4th gen "state of the art" aircraft which hasn't received it's FOC in 16 years from first flight, an order book of 20+20+83 is rope enough.
Add to that 50 waivers by IAF as per CAG report.
What more can IAF do to "support" ?

Nirav'ji., systems have gone very complex. Nobody., I *will* tell you nobody has a test matrix that covers all the permutations and combinations of various flight profiles and weapon system integrations and nobody will even certify such a matrix.

From cars to phones to software to planes to ship to everything., testing is done in real life and lessons learnt and incorporated. This is actually a quick way of arriving at a system. Further customer commitment is a must. Basically, achievable goals are set and the system incorporated as soon as possible to create an effective feedback loop. By waiting unnecessarily long - the feedback loop is never created and the system thus never matures.

When Air-chief calls a fighter plane as 3-legged cheetah., it basically means that the effort needs to be undermined.

Now coming to Tejas., IAF is not buying "A" fighter plane but "IS" buying a system. A 100% fighting fit squadron of Tejas is way way way better than 60% fighting fit squadron of M2k.

[Karan M]

especially when at the drop of a hat serviceability of these imported types drops to 40-50% because of OEM arm twisting. it effectively took a new govt to convince russia to change their laws, stock up several hundred crores of spares in india to move serviceability to 63% from 46% of our frontline fighter, which the OEM basically used indian money to develop and then make a windfall out of by selling to multiple countries.

[Karan M]

meanwhile uttam continues to advance.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-eFl3M7xUaN4/ ... -MMR-1.jpg
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RSBZ96pzGUM/ ... -MMR-3.jpg

the range figures, if achieved in actual tests, will be healthy capability, and are firmly in current MiG-29 class PESA/MSA category + AESA functionality (far more important, see LPI aims for instance). for a su-30 mki class performance we are talking of a very heavy increase and a good upgrade option in case other OEMs armtwist.

[Kartik]

Ooh boy !

[Karan M]

derbys outboard, check
new radome, done
all that is needed is a new EW suite, then yeehaw

[nirav]

^kadak pic.

@ Disha ji,

Certain unfortunate statements by some gents in the airforce have zero impact on the engineering or the testing or the capability of the LCA.

Delay or not of LCA has no bearing on us, we being jingoes/fanbois on the sidelines.

A lot is being made of the three legged cheetah comment or the mig21s++ comment and is being presented as conclusive proof of IAF being "unsupportive"
Navy didn't make any such statements.
As per the "supportive" metric in here navy gets that certificate but AF does not.

How and in what material way has being "supportive" as per the metric helped the navy ?
What prompted the CNS to say what he did ?

Guys are so hung up on that statement by ACM Naik they refuse to acknowledge ACM Arup Raha flying the LCA and ACM Dhanoa flying it ! 2 airchiefs flying the LCA and 20+20+83 orders and IAF is still unsupportive.

Has any CNS flown the LCA yet ?

If so much weightage has to be given to out of turn statements, why won't anyone discuss the statements coming out of ADA/DRDO .. from first flight back in 2001, how many of their timelines have gone down the drain ?

Has the delay affected IAFs re equipment? Of course it has.
My point is, there has been extreme vilification of the IAF by calling it unsupportive,import pasand and other such terms.

It totally uncalled for and unfair.

[Karan M]

how many timelines went down the drain because AHQ refused to support the LCA. AM Philip Rajkumar in the LCA Story - "staff advised Tipnis not to visit LCAs first flight since it would send a message AF supported the aircraft. I told him sir, its being made for IAF not PAF. Then he came"
"Phillip Rajkumar: denied promotion for all his work at ADA, since it was a "cushy posting to run the LCA" and finally Kalam/DRDO fought against the AF brass and got him his due.

IAF did all it could to be unsupportve to the LCA, joined the program late, and even towards the end, there were attempts to scuttle the program by the Rafale lobby.

Unfair, LOL. IAF didn't want the LCA and did all it could to stay away, its well known. No amount of pretending otherwise will take that away. Or being abusive towards "hecklers" who tell it as it is, whether it be this, or the Kaveri snafu or the MMR delay or an ex HAL chiefs deliberate attempts to move focus away from LCA.. all are known. IAF joining the program late and then raising changes late, will cause issues. Hope the IAF has learnt from it and move on.

[nirav]

Right.
The perceived slights cause it to take 16 years from first flight to no FOC yet.

Need to get out of saasbahu mentality, you said this that, oh I felt bad.

Do you have anything to show for the NAVY which was "supportive" as per the metric in here ?
Kya ukhada of the "support" ?

IAF atleast has 3 operational LCA.
Navy doesn't even have a lemon.

[Karan M]

Right.
The perceived slights cause it to take 16 years from first flight to no FOC yet.

Need to get out of saasbahu mentality, you said this that, oh I felt bad.

dont be deliberately dense or are you really this thick?

there are no perceived slights, there is a deliberate disinterest in a key national program which means AF joins it late. which means changes sggested come in late, after TD level and PV level, which staggers up changes towards the IOC-2 level.

do you even understand such basic things before spouting off?

tell you what , wave a flag. dance a jig. tell everyone else how much more nationalistic you are. we get it.

or go speak to anyone involved in such programs and ask them the challenges done by late requests without which no clearance will be given.

Do you have anything to show for the NAVY which was "supportive" as per the metric in here ?

are rahul gandhi of BRF, do you even know anything about the LCA or have you come campaigning at the cusp of the campaign?

the navy has always maintained it was brought into the LCA late, and as a result, its operational needs were not adequately taken care of by the developers who were scrammbling to fix the late changes suggested by the AF and move the LCA into a true ops bird. it felt like it was always secondary to ADAs desire to placate the IAF.

Kya ukhada of the "support" ?

bahut ukhada.. tera nahin ukhada wohin bahut kiya..

IAF atleast has 3 operational LCA.
Navy doesn't even have a lemon.

navy has a chance to get a purpose designed operational NLCA Mk2 thanks to the TD LCA derived from the AF LCA. which is what happens when a program is joined late by its primary intended user which throws everything out of whack and soaks up any effort to do any super out of the box effort for the secondary partner.

[Cybaru]

Navy has a broad range of programs from carriers, destroyers to submarines that are made in India by local yards. They are far more complex as they require a whole host of technologies that need to be perfected. Yet it choose this route and over the decades through iteration by designing and getting MIC to produce world class products. It didn't wait for the finest/best, it choose the good enough route and has done wonders for itself. That is one of the reasons that people still don't mind it when navy says something won't work and it looks outside. There is a high probability that it has looked at local programs and done due diligence before taking that step.

As for the 3 in service Tejas, since we are around valentines day, in my opinion, IAF had a shot gun marriage with the Tejas. Lets hope it falls in love!

[brvarsh]

I have many of my questions unfulfilled, many includes not limited to - If aliens exist, if yeti exists and now I add has IAF and IN really abandoned LCA? Why? If yes. Raises bigger question how to make home Industry to step to the plate and establish it to achieve long term strategic goal of self reliance. I see why IAF or IN behaves like a Customer to get what they want but the Government at least at this point appears clueless on how to make it happen and provide partners and funds that are needed.

[Karan M]

looks like the rahul gandhi of brf really needs things dumbed down.

when an user is in synch with the program from day one - such as the USHUS sonar lets take an example - the designer and user combinaton goes far beyond mere brochure bashing. a person from the navy is appointed to the sonar team. he too has to be technically aware of the issues. he also has delegation capability. in case he sees some things are unobtanium he can clear things at lab level itself. then second level, needs relaxation at higher group. this way the progress keeps ticking along. all in between BEL guys are integrated. prototype BOMs are shared with BEL. both sides exchanced notes on production standard items. finally at time of LSP, USHUS is ready with most of navy key wants & needs and is ready for tests. AFTER THIS, USHUS enters actual operational trials which are protracted and teething troubles are solved one by one.

all this when user is keenly involved. and APSOH experience exists. and so does HUMSA.

now take the user out of the picture. almost entirely. ad hoc visits at beginning. deputing one AF guy to the program and then treating him badly for actually taking charge of the program. then parachuting people in randomly asking them to run the program ad getting rebuffed. finally agreeing to cooperate two decades in, after TDs are done and PV has started. everything from HUD to weaponry suite now has a new input. because AF has now decided things need to be added because "now". and guess what, literally nothing from TDs or early PVs can be used. all LRUs in redesign, much time in optiimization - because all the earlier effort was done with TD aim not weaponization, because AF was hands off and said TD-PV then we'll see.. and even then, had to be literally asked to join the program.

This on top of the tech sanctions, the lack of funding till 93 (ask Rajkumar saar) etc etc.

[nirav]

Cute.
You choose to conveniently ignore other points that I've raised.
Yet if you consider that IAF had an ulterior motive, why don't you be an equal opportunity fellow and hai hai the ADA/DDRO too ?

The numbers that they put our, in 2 years.. wait another 2 .. oh no 3 more years, MiGs start retiring, next year pakka.. oops, Cobham didn't send, on the cusp... Still coming through..

Were those scientific advisers and program managers lying through their teeth how much time it'd take for the LCA to get FOC or were they clueless?

If they got hurt and pissed by IAF 'slights' they could have used it to spur them to deliver earlier than time lines.

But on this thread, some statements made in the past, hold onto them for eternity, and IAF is open to abuse.

You or me aren't going to fight the two front war IAF has been tasked with fighting.
The pakis and Chinese won't be much interested in your multi quote heckling and RTB cause of paper specs.

Get a grip.

[Karan M]

I have many of my questions unfulfilled, many includes not limited to - If aliens exist, if yeti exists and now I add has IAF and IN really abandoned LCA? Why? If yes. Raises bigger question how to make home Industry to step to the plate and establish it to achieve long term strategic goal of self reliance. I see why IAF or IN behaves like a Customer to get what they want but the Government at least at this point appears clueless on how to make it happen and provide partners and funds that are needed.

GOI has dragged an IAF which was not even willing to look at simpler options beyond Mk2 to commit to Mk1A. So now LCA production run of 120 units is finally assured. The GOI has also kciked HAL into expanding its production rate to 16/yr and made it support itsproducts. It has also said Mk2 will happen. AMCA will happen. NLCA Mk2 will happen. These programs will run on, inspite of doubting thomases and whiners on BR (not you) who will constantly sledge the efforts undertaken. They neither understand what it takes to make things, or what the imports really are often wise.. these gents will whine about an imported engine on the LCA but then claim whole F-16 from Khan is fine...

[Rakesh]

looks like the rahul gandhi of brf really needs things dumbed down.

You know he is asking for thapad and you Saar are obliged to give it him. Bash on Regardless! The more he trolls like this, he is going to come into the eyes of an admin and his kahani will be khalas! Till then, many of us are watching with glee (I have my Jonnie Walker Red Label already open!) as you take him down. What a troll!

[Karan M]

Cute.
You choose to conveniently ignore other points that I've raised.

what other ideas am i to pick up from your exit velocity rubbish style talk??

Yet if you consider that IAF had an ulterior motive, why don't you be an equal opportunity fellow and hai hai the ADA/DDRO too ?

rahul gandhi onlee. dude.

multi-quote heckling for your pla-sure.

Or being abusive towards "hecklers" who tell it as it is, whether it be this, or the Kaveri snafu or the MMR delay or an ex HAL chiefs deliberate attempts to move focus away from LCA.. all are known

here biscuit style breakdown:

Kaveri snafu (GTRE/ADA)
MMR delay (GTRE/ADA/LRDE/IAF - which waffled over which radar in case you complain and say why why)
ex HAL chiefs deliberate attempts to move focus away from LCA.. all are known (ex-HAL chief, not ex-IAF chief in case you misread tis too)

The numbers that they put our, in 2 years.. wait another 2 .. oh no 3 more years, MiGs start retiring, next year pakka.. oops, Cobham didn't send, on the cusp... Still coming through..

haan jee because if the primary customer comes in and says hello, combat jet has all this, and this, ad this, ad this, and we are not willing to accept this, and this and this... then 2, 3 etc ho ke rahega... engineers engineer, requirements change they cannot produce rabbits out of a hat... would cobham radome be required if IAF was willing to accept kopyo sized ranges on LCA as a Mk1? Did JF-17 MK1 have BVR?

ask the euros on how tey release staggered upgrades.. mature industry + customer. accept it in service & keep upgrading. meanwhile glowing advertorials and kick the tires displays of stuff wich will be avalable ten years later. "AESA ready fighter" etc.

Were those scientific advisers and program managers lying through their teeth how much time it'd take for the LCA to get FOC or were they clueless?

Oh both. they musta figured politico-brass combine was lying through its teeth that it would support the program and were hence paranoid enough to do CYA or they were overcome by challenges the likes of which you don't understand. take your pick. since youre the uber patriot and the scientific advisers and program managers can magically advise jet engines and radomes out of thin air, they must be clueless too..
why oh why didn't they get you? nirav? with the cold fusion reactor transmogrifier in his juhu flat which can churn out all sanctioned components! cheap and best tikau!

If they got hurt and pissed by IAF 'slights' they could have used it to spur them to deliver earlier than time lines.

oh yes. they shoulda told US also we got hurt and pissed, so please send us engines. actuators. LOL.

i mean you are so clueless to be clueless.

heres what happened. 4 primary reasons of delay

LCA delay - money
LCA delay - sanctions
LCA delay - tech challenges
LCA delay - IAF disinterest

which of these are influenced by hurt and pissed hulks to overcome?

i mean, do you think this is some hindi movie buddy? america will send us stuff or we can magically make shrooms and warp engines.. coz coz coz.. wait for it... our buddy thinks this is a romance movie and an aashik can do anything (Cue SRK in background pining)

But on this thread, some statements made in the past, hold onto them for eternity, and IAF is open to abuse.

quit whining man. accept the fact that the IAF messed up, as did ADA, as did HAL and it will all go on, as long as guys like you pick sides and try to act all poincey noincey.

everything wll also be settled if the IAF commits to the LCA Mk2 in depth, if the HAL ADA MOD guys commit to deliver. has IAF said anything about a MK2?

You or me aren't going to fight the two front war IAF has been tasked with fighting.

the iaf won't be fighting a two front war all too well wit imported junk that languishes becauses missiles are faulty or spares dont work or sanctions because green party decided war is bad.

The pakis and Chinese won't be much interested in your multi quote heckling and RTB cause of paper specs.

the pakis and chinese will be however very impressed by your delivering glowing statement of their accurate blurred fotus and all too accurate specs.

as we all know, indians are incompetent and your chinese and pakistani overlords are ever so truthful.

Get a grip.

lay off the weed

[nirav]

Brilliant,
Thank you for proving my point Rakesh Saar.

Propose of the thread indeed is forming a mutual admiration society.
Some in here think they are doing the LCA a favour by keeping up with the narrative of IAF bad bad, unsupportive, import pasand, which btw can't attract a ban.

If I question the status quo, heckle and abuse me and hope I get banned.
Some "discussion".

Karan, get a napkin and wipe that froth..

[Karan M]

Brilliant,
Thank you for proving my point Rakesh Saar.

Propose of the thread indeed is forming a mutual admiration society.
Some in here think they are doing the LCA a favour by keeping up with the narrative of IAF bad bad, unsupportive, import pasand, which btw can't attract a ban.

If I question the status quo, heckle and abuse me and hope I get banned.
Some "discussion".

Quit whining man..

Karan, get a napkin and wipe that froth..

are you sure whats coming out of you is froth? wipe it yourself ...

[Rakesh]

Nirav: you and me should play a game. Let's ignore each other for eternity. Since i proposed the game, you are it. Now go away!

[Karan M]

you hurt and pissed his feelings rakesh, so so so so... per his own theorem, he will spend all his time on BRF making it up to you. he will show you the power!! HE-MAN!

and if he doesn't perhaps then he will get a clue about how demoralizing folks is perhaps.. not the greatest idea when you want them to be on your side.

but what am i sayin. this is nirav. he likes being pissed. he thinks its all good. he ignores the "slights". lay it on. he loves it.

[nirav]

Rakesh, feel free to ignore me.
Not going anywhere.Didnt sign up on BR 13 years back to go away cause of some heckling

[Karan M]

how can you do that. you like it. its exactly what you wanted!

"If Nirav got hurt and pissed by Rakesh's 'slights' he could have used it to spur him".

Modi-fied quote bhaiyyo aur behno. Snce RG's in da house.

[nirav]

how can you do that. you like it. its exactly what you wanted!

"If Nirav got hurt and pissed by Rakesh's 'slights' he could have used it to spur him".

Modi-fied quote bhaiyyo aur behno. Snce RG's in da house.

How old are you? Seriously.

I've been repeatedly asking for a discussion on accountability wrt missed timelines of the LCA and asking posters to not unfairly blame the airforce.
Criticism is still okay abuse is just NOT okay.
Any newbie reading the past few pages will come to an erroneous conclusion that the IAF is at fault for ALL the delay in LCA.

That simply is not true.
One poster was banned only after I started posting about how wrong it is and shouldn't be allowed.
Till then it was okay.

And yes, if IAF is open to criticism, so is LCA.
What's with 'anyone criticising LCA must be heckled/abused' ?

[Cybaru]

I think LCA gets criticised everyday and it's exhausting to see foriegn interests run it down to peddle their own wares. There is so much criticism of it that it's unfair. I also feel nirav, you are trolling more than arguing.

[Karan M]

How old are you? Seriously.

old enough to have had enough of your grandiose hypocrisy and clue-lessness..
again, you say pissing off and slighting folks is A-ok. why are you not holding yourself to your own standard?

I've been repeatedly asking for a discussion on accountability wrt missed timelines of the LCA and asking posters to not unfairly blame the airforce.

LOL when those reasons are given, you deliberately omit any mention of the AF and posture as any mention of the AF = unfair, implying all sorts of bunk..

So again, Nirav - how old are you?

Serious. because your posts come across as that of a child. you demonstrate zero critical thinking (see above, you can't even hold yourself to your own standard & protest being "heckled" while you think "pissed off and slighted" designers are "spurred".

Criticism is still okay abuse is just NOT okay.

perhaps you should have been sharing this with all the 3-legged cheetah, 3rd gen types too?

Any newbie reading the past few pages will come to an erroneous conclusion that the IAF is at fault for ALL the delay in LCA.

Oh the feels. Newbies are so clueless they can't and mustn't be told the truth, lest they come to "erroneous conclusions".

JNU version of teaching indian history to students redux?

Perhaps our newbies are more aware & can make their own judgements.

That simply is not true.
One poster was banned only after I started posting about how wrong it is and shouldn't be allowed.
Till then it was okay.

the reach you have, shiver me timbers.

of course, it just couldn't be that the mods have something called check posts and when a user crosses a threshold, they can take action on their own.

nopes. you did it nirav, all you.

And yes, if IAF is open to criticism, so is LCA.

Corollary: If LCA is open to criticism & that program includes the IAF, it too is open to critique.

So what's your bother?

What's with 'anyone criticising LCA must be heckled/abused' ?

No, just treating you the same way you treat others wit the same arguments

I still don't get why you are not "spurred though" and feeling warm & cuddly inside.

In Niravs words, slights & pissing off equal to "spur". No spur here? Make happy face?

[tsarkar]

Do you have any source, because I know for a fact that Russians were upset because we brought Israeli stuff instead of paying them to develop EO pods.

For Sea Harrier, I know the officer who managed LUSH. He is a Rear Admiral now. The British were planning to retire the Harrier, had zero interest, and and told us we may do as we wish. We had reached out to them for Pegasus engine spares and possible upgrades, not Radar & AAM.

Same for the Jaguar.

Can't talk about this in the open.

With due respect, Indranil, your information is not correct. I discussed with someone who worked on 8222 Integration on MiG-29K and Sea Harrier. In all cases, the Israeli's were emphatic Russians were not involved (for geopolitical rivalry reasons) and British (commercial rivalry reasons).

You would've read how TKS went with SAGEM instead of Ferranti in DARIN.

IAF specifically made IAPO design MKI around MIl-STD-1553B for this very reason. We have the code for Bars that is built at HAL Hyderabad, that enabled quick integration of Astra. We did BrahMos integration. We will choose our AESA for Su-30 upgrade instead of waiting for the Russians. Atleast for Su-30, MiG-29K, Sea Harrier & Jaguar, we have zero obligation to Russians and British.

[Karan M]

I think LCA gets criticised everyday and it's exhausting to see foriegn interests run it down to peddle their own wares. There is so much criticism of it that it's unfair. I also feel nirav, you are trolling more than arguing.

this.
after all the crap LCA has suffered from clueless and vested interests. at AI, open the thread and see some self proclaimed patriot making all sorts of crap claims on the program. so much so that a response got back.
and all this for newbies so they swallow the propaganda that LCA is delayed becoz of incompetent locals and MMRCA is a must and this, that and two front war, and how dare you say otherwise, you traitor. all that's missing is is the tiranga and a pitchfork (aviation fuel onlee).

[nirav]

Karan,pray tell, do you multi quote and heckle and engage in name calling like this in real life too if someone disagrees with you?
Like say the gf/wife ?

[Karan M]

Can't talk about this in the open.

With due respect, Indranil, your information is not correct. I discussed with someone who worked on 8222 Integration on MiG-29K and Sea Harrier. In all cases, the Israeli's were emphatic Russians were not involved (for geopolitical rivalry reasons) and British (commercial rivalry reasons).

You would've read how TKS went with SAGEM instead of Ferranti in DARIN.

IAF specifically made IAPO design MKI around MIl-STD-1553B for this very reason. We have the code for Bars that is built at HAL Hyderabad, that enabled quick integration of Astra. We did BrahMos integration. Atleast for Su-30, MiG-29K, Sea Harrier & Jaguar, we have zero obligation to Russians and British.

well the flip side is 8222 integration with MKI has failed. i hope we got enough SAP-518s. DARE is yet to demonstrate, clear trials with its large suites
Not sure we have access to Bars codes - perhaps we have managed to integrate a third datalink in the airframe & missile so we don't need the missile code to fire (the mode output will be available via the MC to the system). Other issue is of timing challenges between R-118 and L-8222, either our LF infra is simly unable to test on the ground or we dont have the codes.

[Karan M]

Karan,pray tell, do you multi quote and heckle and engage in name calling like this in real life too if someone disagrees with you?

pray tell, how does one deal wth people who exhibit loony tunes behavior on a public forum..either ignore them until they swamp the forum with their rubbish...OR... take the fly swatter out.

Like say the gf/wife ?

you are neither and won't be either...

[nirav]

I think LCA gets criticised everyday and it's exhausting to see foriegn interests run it down to peddle their own wares. There is so much criticism of it that it's unfair. I also feel nirav, you are trolling more than arguing.

Trolling isn't my intent.
What's happening here is 100℅ of the blame is being apportioned to the IAF.
Abuse and words like "import pasand" are fair game.
Even the CNS was a target some days ago until a report came that the mk2 won't be cancelled.

I take strong objection to it and have expressed my views.

If our intent is to have a zero non criticism policy for LCA, even if it's valid, then yes I've crossed that line.

you are neither and won't be either...

[Karan M]

With due respect, Indranil, your information is not correct. I discussed with someone who worked on 8222 Integration on MiG-29K and Sea Harrier. In all cases, the Israeli's were emphatic Russians were not involved (for geopolitical rivalry reasons) and British (commercial rivalry reasons).

You would've read how TKS went with SAGEM instead of Ferranti in DARIN.

IAF specifically made IAPO design MKI around MIl-STD-1553B for this very reason. We have the code for Bars that is built at HAL Hyderabad, that enabled quick integration of Astra. We did BrahMos integration. Atleast for Su-30, MiG-29K, Sea Harrier & Jaguar, we have zero obligation to Russians and British.

well the flip side is 8222 integration with MKI has failed. i hope we got enough SAP-518s. DARE is yet to demonstrate, clear trials with its large suites
Not sure we have access to Bars codes - perhaps we have managed to integrate a third datalink in the airframe & missile so we don't need the missile code to fire (the mode output will be available via the MC to the system). Other issue is of timing challenges between R-118 and L-8222, either our LF infra is simly unable to test on the ground or we dont have the codes.

BTW when you say the codes, i am assuming you mean access to reprogram the PSP with whatever we see fit & full access to the high level software running on the processor implementing the algos for each mode (eg search etc).

I sincerely doubt russians would let us within a mile of those.

HAL or LRDE get that, they'd shave a decade off their own programs.

[Karan M]

until we build large ground infra - y'know the kind we can cart entire aircraft into hangers ad then paint them with variety of radars and/or test their emitters, we will have issues with 3rd party airframes and our mix and match avionics.

IMHO its no coincidence HAL is asking for radar & EW together for the LCA. If the RWR comes in the package too, even better. DARE's solutions haven't passed muster. yet.

[Cybaru]

I think LCA gets criticised everyday and it's exhausting to see foriegn interests run it down to peddle their own wares. There is so much criticism of it that it's unfair. I also feel nirav, you are trolling more than arguing.

Trolling isn't my intent.
What's happening here is 100℅ of the blame is being apportioned to the IAF.
Abuse and words like "import pasand" are fair game.
Even the CNS was a target some days ago until a report came that the mk2 won't be cancelled.

I take strong objection to it and have expressed my views.

If our intent is to have a zero non criticism policy for LCA, even if it's valid, then yes I've crossed that line.

You make up stuff to embellish your arguments. I called you out in single engine thread, but then you pivot and do a Kelly Anne Conway elsewhere. Hard to keep track of your alternative facts. If trolling isn't your intent then perhaps don't do this.

[Karan M]

russian radar - we can't let the israelis test it.
israeli jammer - we can't let the russians have it.
russian airframe - we can't test it actually and have to simulate it.
packaging - squeeze in yehudi, indian stuff amongst densely packed 1980's russian flanker gear repurposed for su-30 MKI.

finally - russian radar upg, new SAP jammer, new desi RWR to avoid blanking (yet to clear trials)

gets harder and harder. no wonder the AF wanted a quick ad easy MMRCA. open box, all is ready. if only..

[Karan M]

Trolling isn't my intent.
What's happening here is 100℅ of the blame is being apportioned to the IAF.
Abuse and words like "import pasand" are fair game.
Even the CNS was a target some days ago until a report came that the mk2 won't be cancelled.

I take strong objection to it and have expressed my views.

If our intent is to have a zero non criticism policy for LCA, even if it's valid, then yes I've crossed that line.

You make up stuff to embellish your arguments. I called you out in single engine thread, but then you pivot and do a Kelly Anne Conway elsewhere. Hard to keep track of your alternative facts. If trolling isn't your intent then perhaps don't do this.

Bingo.

He sees it as ok.

"Its ok if criticism is unfounded"

[nirav]

Trolling isn't my intent.
What's happening here is 100℅ of the blame is being apportioned to the IAF.
Abuse and words like "import pasand" are fair game.
Even the CNS was a target some days ago until a report came that the mk2 won't be cancelled.

I take strong objection to it and have expressed my views.

If our intent is to have a zero non criticism policy for LCA, even if it's valid, then yes I've crossed that line.

You make up stuff to embellish your arguments. I called you out in single engine thread, but then you pivot and do a Kelly Anne Conway elsewhere. Hard to keep track of your alternative facts. If trolling isn't your intent then perhaps don't do this.

Do quote stuff that I've made up.
I must have missed your post in the other thread.Ill get back to you there.

If by 'this' you mean don't object to terms like import pasand for the IAF, then sorry I can't oblige.

[Cybaru]

Seriously you know what "this" is dude... I feel like there are chalks screeching on a blackboard somewhere...