LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
I think by the time the engine comes online and gets qualified, it will be another 7-10 years from now. Great for the next project, but for now IAF should just purchase off the shelf. Importing this makes more sense than importing F-16/Gripen-2026-FOC item.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Our next role round of AJT will come after at least 10 years, enough to get ready a derated version of Kaveri ready.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 866
- Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Has SP5/6 flown ? any news ? eagerly waiting.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Gagan wrote:This article mentions them developing an engine with a 35-40kN thrustKartik wrote: Wow! What's the source of the info?
http://idrw.org/aero-india-2017-htfe-25 ... hrust-hal/
This is HUGE (in parlance of Unkil Prez Trump.)
It really is, a very realistic and attainable project with enormous impact. Especially since the twin-engined Jaguar would be a perfect testbed -- Adnour in one nacelle HTFE-derivative in another. Unlike the kaveri and LCA (though I guess we could have done the same with a MiG-29 ig kaveri had ever advanced to that point.) We pull this off and we will be on our way to a mature aviation eco-system.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Chola ji, on one side we're hearing that India is going to buy used Jaguar frames from France to cannibalise for parts. If HAL cannot make these parts, how do expect them to integrate an engine into these Jags?
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Idrw behaves a lot like Sengupta. Are there any other sources to confirm ?
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
HAL is more likely to develop that engine for a UCAV than Jaguar. The timeline is not realistic.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Any news about the selection of AESA radar and jamming pod for the LCA Mk1A?
This is very concerning, as the whole point of Mk1A was a quick upgrade from Mk1, quick production and induction. Any delays in selecting and ordering the radar and jamming pod open the door for more imports and put the entire LCA program at risk.
Since they already had the half-Israeli radar and Israeli missiles on Mk1, why did they not just order the Israeli AESA radar and jamming pod and thus quickly build the MK1A for the IAF? The whole tendering thing 'to get a better/ cheaper alternative' is an example of the best becoming the enemy of good enough.
In the Indian context, the very words RFI/ RFP these days fill me with dread. Which RFI/ RFP has been completed in less than 5 years?
This thing gives me a deja vu feeling of MMRCA saga again. 'Looking for the best', 'extensive evaluations' all ending up with zilch.
As a side note, I think one of the biggest acts of treason against independent India was committed by the two MoD Babus who refused to allow the purchase of 126 M2K-5 as a follow-on order. Not fielding the Mk1A to b ready for induction withing the next couple of years will be a similar act of treason in my book.
This is very concerning, as the whole point of Mk1A was a quick upgrade from Mk1, quick production and induction. Any delays in selecting and ordering the radar and jamming pod open the door for more imports and put the entire LCA program at risk.
Since they already had the half-Israeli radar and Israeli missiles on Mk1, why did they not just order the Israeli AESA radar and jamming pod and thus quickly build the MK1A for the IAF? The whole tendering thing 'to get a better/ cheaper alternative' is an example of the best becoming the enemy of good enough.
In the Indian context, the very words RFI/ RFP these days fill me with dread. Which RFI/ RFP has been completed in less than 5 years?
This thing gives me a deja vu feeling of MMRCA saga again. 'Looking for the best', 'extensive evaluations' all ending up with zilch.
As a side note, I think one of the biggest acts of treason against independent India was committed by the two MoD Babus who refused to allow the purchase of 126 M2K-5 as a follow-on order. Not fielding the Mk1A to b ready for induction withing the next couple of years will be a similar act of treason in my book.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
The competition was likely an attempt to keep the Israeli suppliers honest. It is extremely hard to overcome the integration, and weapon compatibility advantage for a radar that is essentially integrated and mated to a particular BVR missile already integrated on the aircraft.Since they already had the half-Israeli radar and Israeli missiles on Mk1, why did they not just order the Israeli AESA radar and jamming pod and thus quickly build the MK1A for the IAF? The whole tendering thing 'to get a better/ cheaper alternative' is an example of the best becoming the enemy of good enough.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 1019
- Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Whats the definition of "extremely hard". If one attempts it will one get an incurable migraine? Will it require 10 software vinies 10 years? Whats the definition. I dont think its "extremely hard", i think its "nearly easy"brar_w wrote:The competition was likely an attempt to keep the Israeli suppliers honest. It is extremely hard to overcome the integration, and weapon compatibility advantage for a radar that is essentially integrated and mated to a particular BVR missile already integrated on the aircraft.Since they already had the half-Israeli radar and Israeli missiles on Mk1, why did they not just order the Israeli AESA radar and jamming pod and thus quickly build the MK1A for the IAF? The whole tendering thing 'to get a better/ cheaper alternative' is an example of the best becoming the enemy of good enough.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Extremely hard as in a highly competitive (as in significantly lower) price to offset the integration cost and timeframe that the incumbent sensor enjoys. The Israelis are offering a sensor the IAF has evaluated, has integrated on the said aircraft, and has a compatible BVR weapon that is also integrated on the platform.Whats the definition of "extremely hard". If one attempts it will one get an incurable migrane? Will it require 10 software vinies 10 years? Whats the definition. I dont think its "extremely hard", i think its "nearly easy"
The other competitors have to essentially create a bespoke sensor and then integrate it on the platform and weapon. That is a fairly significant advantage which would be hard to overcome by most reasonable standards.
Shouldn't be very hard to understand that the incumbent enjoys a significant competitive advantage unless the MOD is willing to assume risk in both cost, and timeline to work with other OEM's to develop and integrate a sensor and then have them collaborate with the Israelis to integrate the weapon.
Last edited by brar_w on 18 Jun 2017 06:47, edited 6 times in total.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
I assume the Israelis also know this. So, good luck trying to keep them honest when they know they have the advantage. All this is doing is delaying the Mk1A.brar_w wrote:The competition was likely an attempt to keep the Israeli suppliers honest. It is extremely hard to overcome the integration, and weapon compatibility advantage for a radar that is essentially integrated and mated to a particular BVR missile already integrated on the aircraft.
Just do a G2G deal with the Israelis on this, and be done with it. And focus on getting the Indian AESA radar and jamming pod ready in time for Mk2.
The LCA was meant to build numbers at a time of critical need. All these delays will lead to large-scale imports that will kill the LCA.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Rishi ji, do you have to be obnoxious in every thread you visit? We get it, you are some kind of techno-management Mandarin of sorts who probably built up a multi billion euro company from scratch. I am pretty sure you will share all your wisdom in a tell all book, because I can't find any in your posts, which by the nature of this forum, are free and public domain.Rishi Verma wrote:
Whats the definition of "extremely hard". If one attempts it will one get an incurable migraine? Will it require 10 software vinies 10 years? Whats the definition. I dont think its "extremely hard", i think its "nearly easy"
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 1019
- Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
if you dont understand my text means you launch a personal attack.. Obviously you have a lot of free time to scan my posts and try to find meaning.Thakur_B wrote:Rishi ji, do you have to be obnoxious in every thread you visit? We get it, you are some kind of techno-management Mandarin of sorts who probably built up a multi billion euro company from scratch. I am pretty sure you will share all your wisdom in a tell all book, because I can't find any in your posts, which by the nature of this forum, are free and public domain.Rishi Verma wrote:
Whats the definition of "extremely hard". If one attempts it will one get an incurable migraine? Will it require 10 software vinies 10 years? Whats the definition. I dont think its "extremely hard", i think its "nearly easy"
Yes i am quiet very well off, successful and self-made man, and damn proud of it too because i didnt use my papa's money or influence nor i needed any reservation quota. Do you have any problem with that?
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Brar sahab,
There is no other explanation for this tender, but for your intuition. Let's just say the Israelis were getting too comfortable.
Rishi sir,
Let's say it is a multi-man-years headache. It's doable, but completely useless.
There is no other explanation for this tender, but for your intuition. Let's just say the Israelis were getting too comfortable.
Rishi sir,
Let's say it is a multi-man-years headache. It's doable, but completely useless.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
It is most certainly doable. Most competitors including Israel will be gladly willing to design a new radar for the LCA and then work on integrating it with the Tejas and then its weapons suite. Of course the MOD would have to bear all the added cost and schedule which sort of goes against the whole point of fielding an interim capability while the Uttam suite is fully developed and available.
Stranger things have probably happened but I'm not sure of many fighter projects that will have 2 active radar developmental projects (Uttam and the new AESA if one is to assume that they select a different radar than the one currently integrated) and 1/2 integrated radars even before 100 units have been built.
Stranger things have probably happened but I'm not sure of many fighter projects that will have 2 active radar developmental projects (Uttam and the new AESA if one is to assume that they select a different radar than the one currently integrated) and 1/2 integrated radars even before 100 units have been built.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
JTull wrote:Chola ji, on one side we're hearing that India is going to buy used Jaguar frames from France to cannibalise for parts. If HAL cannot make these parts, how do expect them to integrate an engine into these Jags?
Not necessarily. The airframe and engine are two separate things. The old licensed lines for the Jaguars are gone decades ago. Can't expect HAL to continue to make every part for this old plane. If we are going to re-engine the aircraft with the HTFE-25 then that is when we'll make all the necessary parts for fitting in the new engine.
I have great hopes for this one because it does not sound pie-in-the-sky. Though, I agree most of the publications out there point to a UAV as the first project for this engine.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
They want to power trainers with it. Will have to wait and see if an up-rated version goes on the Hawks.Thakur_B wrote:HAL is more likely to develop that engine for a UCAV than Jaguar. The timeline is not realistic.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
This is great news.Indranil wrote:They want to power trainers with it. Will have to wait and see if an up-rated version goes on the Hawks.Thakur_B wrote:HAL is more likely to develop that engine for a UCAV than Jaguar. The timeline is not realistic.
Wondering if HAL should be given access to Kaveri for a Kaveri ex, independent of the Snecma-GTRE effort.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
They have. Kaveri is technologically much more challenging than HTFE-25. HAL is playing safe with HTFE. It has the know how to build that (thrust and TWR) class of engine.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
I commend HAL for "playing it safe". If the HTFE-25 can replace the AL-55 in the IJT then that would be a great use. Also having the tech and having a production line are two different levels of tech. Mfg the HTFE-25 would be a great stepping stone - if it happens.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
India's MoD is neither stupid nor treasonous. The French offered to transfer the Mirage 2000 line to India to kill off the Tejas. The MoD wisely rejected that offer. Instead, India ordered more Su-30 MKI's as a capability boost.Kakkaji wrote:As a side note, I think one of the biggest acts of treason against independent India was committed by the two MoD Babus who refused to allow the purchase of 126 M2K-5 as a follow-on order.
Last edited by Avarachan on 20 Jun 2017 01:24, edited 1 time in total.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
I definitely want a source for the IQ level of the MOD Dorks! I mean Babus!!Avarachan wrote:
India's MoD is neither stupid nor treasonous. The French offered to transfer the Mirage 2000 line to India to kill off the Tejas. The MoD wisely rejected that offer. Instead, India ordered more Su-30 MKI's as a stop-gap measure.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Any chance the block 70 F16's LCA Tejas mk II and AMCA can share the same make in India Engines
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 461
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
- Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
- Contact:
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Not possible brother. AMCA can probably do whatever it wants as it is in the design phase. But not - LCA. The F-16 engines are too big and heavy for Tejas, and is a lot more powerful than the requirement. It's akin to putting a bmw 340i engine into a maruti swift.Aditya_V wrote:Any chance the block 70 F16's LCA Tejas mk II and AMCA can share the same make in India Engines
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
How expensive and time consuming would it be to have two companies/teams work on the kaveri?Indranil wrote:They have. Kaveri is technologically much more challenging than HTFE-25. HAL is playing safe with HTFE. It has the know how to build that (thrust and TWR) class of engine.
Gtre/snecma and HAL/GE(maybe) ?
The demand for a successful kaveri would be huge in the near and distant future.
This way, for the extra monies spent, we can aim at risk reduction on such a vital technology and get competition working for us.
Both companies work on the K9 or around the kabini core.
The way things are right now, snecma doesn't have a huge incentive to Make it work and deliver in a time bound manner..
It's almost like a veto.
Last edited by nirav on 20 Jun 2017 00:56, edited 1 time in total.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Paris Air Show has begun and there seems to be next to nill HAL presence, while even Japan, one of the most export reticent countries, is marketing its MPA there. We have a stated goal of exporting the LCA, LCH, Dhruv, HTT-40 and there seems to be absolutely no recognition of the fact that this event garners maximum publicity.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Japanese are also brining their MRJ if I'm correct to the Paris Air Show. HAL seems to be having a stall at Paris Air Show. Products mentioned is LCH...Kartik wrote:Paris Air Show has begun and there seems to be next to nill HAL presence, while even Japan, one of the most export reticent countries, is marketing its MPA there. We have a stated goal of exporting the LCA, LCH, Dhruv, HTT-40 and there seems to be absolutely no recognition of the fact that this event garners maximum publicity.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
When I joined BRF about 10 years ago, I thought that Indian leaders were incredibly foolish. Now, I've come to realize that they are actually very wise and subtle.Vivek K wrote:I definitely want a source for the IQ level of the MOD Dorks! I mean Babus!!Avarachan wrote:
India's MoD is neither stupid nor treasonous. The French offered to transfer the Mirage 2000 line to India to kill off the Tejas. The MoD wisely rejected that offer. Instead, India ordered more Su-30 MKI's as a capability boost.
The Tejas is aerodynamically far superior to the Gripen. The fact that India has been able to develop and protect it from the many attempts to kill it is nothing short of astonishing, in my view. Indian leaders should be respected.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Tata has signed a deal to produce F-16s (Block 70) in India.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
JE Menon wrote:Tata has signed a deal to produce F-16s (Block 70) in India.
The final nail in the coffin for Tejas?
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
No. Both will be produced.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Tata has signed a deal to join forces with lockheed in the Indian single engine aircraft competition which may have a down-select next year, in 2019 or 2020+ timeframe. They aren't producing anything until and unless the tender is pursued to its conclusion and they are awarded the contract. Plenty of pitfalls along the way.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
LCA will lose out. Less orders.JE Menon wrote:No. Both will be produced.
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
F-16 is also pie in the sky.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Hundistan Crimes is pretty explicit: It's an F-16 plant. The FWorth assembly line is being shifted. Now like the "PARKAR" pens "MADE IN Usa" niyar Andheri, there will be Made In Usa eph-16s.
In announcing their agreement at the Paris Airshow, Lockheed and Tata said moving the production base to India would still retain jobs in the United States.“F-16 production in India supports thousands of Lockheed Martin and F-16 supplier jobs in the US, creates new manufacturing jobs in India, and positions Indian industry at the center of the most extensive fighter aircraft supply ecosystem in the world,” a joint statement by the firms said.
the model that is being offered to India will be Block 70, the most modern of all the F-16s.{with model 500 injuns, same as that used in Ford Model T}
“This unprecedented F-16 production partnership between the world’s largest defense contractor and India’s premier industrial house provides India the opportunity to produce, operate and export F-16 Block 70 aircraft, the newest and most advanced version of the world’s most successful, combat-proven multi-role fighter,” the statement said.
Tata is already building airframe components for the C-130 military transport aircraft.
India has not opened formal bidding for the jet order, which is expected to be anything from 100 planes to 250.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
Meanwhile in other news, Lockheed is selling $37B worth of F-35s to various nations. Average price is less than $100M per plane!! That is less than what USAF/USN/USMC are paying, hain?
I wonder what engine goes in those... Brarji?
I wonder what engine goes in those... Brarji?
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
What technologies can we reasonably expect to gain from the TATA-LM agreement to shift F-16 production to India?
Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016
We can expect three-to-five year negotiations before we find out. The technologies deemed critical, sensitive, top-of-the-line or too complex are often non-negotiable or priced beyond means in order to deter such ToT requests. The other way is to drag ToT out over many many years through trickle releases citing "too advanced" to be absorbed by the locals.Kashi wrote:What technologies can we reasonably expect to gain from the TATA-LM agreement to shift F-16 production to India?