LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2595
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cybaru » 04 Jun 2017 07:08

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.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1339
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Gyan » 04 Jun 2017 09:15

Our next role round of AJT will come after at least 10 years, enough to get ready a derated version of Kaveri ready.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ashishvikas » 16 Jun 2017 18:32

Has SP5/6 flown ? any news ? eagerly waiting.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4183
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby chola » 16 Jun 2017 18:51

Gagan wrote:
Kartik wrote:Wow! What's the source of the info?

This article mentions them developing an engine with a 35-40kN thrust

http://idrw.org/aero-india-2017-htfe-25-hindustan-turbofan-engine-25-fired-up-at-full-thrust-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.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2733
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JTull » 17 Jun 2017 01:50

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?

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby jamwal » 17 Jun 2017 10:56

Idrw behaves a lot like Sengupta. Are there any other sources to confirm ?

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Thakur_B » 17 Jun 2017 11:23

HAL is more likely to develop that engine for a UCAV than Jaguar. The timeline is not realistic.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3268
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kakkaji » 18 Jun 2017 04:47

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.

:evil:

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8415
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby brar_w » 18 Jun 2017 05:41

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.


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.

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi Verma » 18 Jun 2017 06:23

brar_w wrote:
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.


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.


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
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8415
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby brar_w » 18 Jun 2017 06:25

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"


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.

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.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3268
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kakkaji » 18 Jun 2017 06:27

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.


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.

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. :(

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Thakur_B » 18 Jun 2017 06:55

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"


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
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi Verma » 18 Jun 2017 07:22

Thakur_B wrote:
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"


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.


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. :rotfl:

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?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8049
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 18 Jun 2017 07:29

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.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8415
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby brar_w » 18 Jun 2017 07:37

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.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4183
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby chola » 18 Jun 2017 07:58

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.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8049
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 18 Jun 2017 11:11

Thakur_B wrote:HAL is more likely to develop that engine for a UCAV than Jaguar. The timeline is not realistic.

They want to power trainers with it. Will have to wait and see if an up-rated version goes on the Hawks.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nirav » 18 Jun 2017 11:23

Indranil wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:HAL is more likely to develop that engine for a UCAV than Jaguar. The timeline is not realistic.

They want to power trainers with it. Will have to wait and see if an up-rated version goes on the Hawks.


This is great news.
Wondering if HAL should be given access to Kaveri for a Kaveri ex, independent of the Snecma-GTRE effort.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8049
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 18 Jun 2017 23:11

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.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2215
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Vivek K » 19 Jun 2017 00:03

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.

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Avarachan » 19 Jun 2017 22:08

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.


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.
Last edited by Avarachan on 20 Jun 2017 01:24, edited 1 time in total.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2215
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Vivek K » 19 Jun 2017 23:02

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.

I definitely want a source for the IQ level of the MOD Dorks! I mean Babus!! :rotfl:

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11642
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Aditya_V » 19 Jun 2017 23:14

Any chance the block 70 F16's LCA Tejas mk II and AMCA can share the same make in India Engines

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 310
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby sohamn » 19 Jun 2017 23:48

Aditya_V wrote:Any chance the block 70 F16's LCA Tejas mk II and AMCA can share the same make in India Engines


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.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nirav » 20 Jun 2017 00:12

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.


How expensive and time consuming would it be to have two companies/teams work on the kaveri?

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.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5013
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kartik » 20 Jun 2017 00:23

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.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nirav » 20 Jun 2017 00:32


Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 20 Jun 2017 01:08

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.

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...

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Avarachan » 20 Jun 2017 01:37

Vivek K wrote:
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.

I definitely want a source for the IQ level of the MOD Dorks! I mean Babus!! :rotfl:


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.

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.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JE Menon » 20 Jun 2017 02:23

Tata has signed a deal to produce F-16s (Block 70) in India.

sunnyP
BRFite
Posts: 1329
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 16:52

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby sunnyP » 20 Jun 2017 02:59

JE Menon wrote:Tata has signed a deal to produce F-16s (Block 70) in India.



The final nail in the coffin for Tejas?

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JE Menon » 20 Jun 2017 03:01

No. Both will be produced.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8415
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby brar_w » 20 Jun 2017 03:43

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.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4426
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 20 Jun 2017 06:01

JE Menon wrote:No. Both will be produced.

LCA will lose out. Less orders.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54165
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 20 Jun 2017 06:39

F-16 is also pie in the sky.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby UlanBatori » 20 Jun 2017 06:40

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.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby UlanBatori » 20 Jun 2017 06:44

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?

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kashi » 20 Jun 2017 06:50

What technologies can we reasonably expect to gain from the TATA-LM agreement to shift F-16 production to India?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4426
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 20 Jun 2017 06:58

Kashi wrote:What technologies can we reasonably expect to gain from the TATA-LM agreement to shift F-16 production to India?


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.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests