LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 01 Jul 2017 04:00

Apologies for overreaction.

Even if we plan to order 100s of F16s or actually order F16s, we should create a third line. Not only it should help,
1. reduce the AC shortfall and that too quickly
2. Scientific and Economic perspective is always there
3. For F16 on any other plane, we might know the plane from our singapore experience, but actually using it and putting it to use would require development of flying tactics that too would take time. Just like Mig 21 and Su 30 didnt participate in '65 and '99
4. Ahuja sir's analysis and Pilot's experience tells LCA will not be a pushover to F16 (paki threat)
Net net, from a pure military perspective, it makes much more sense to invest in a new line and get it in more and more no.s..
From a technological perspective, even if Kaveri doesnt sees much success, it will still be a reasonable plane where we will have a potential for future growth into MCA (not just AMCA, we are jumping a step) and NLCA.
Perhaps those funds are better utilized for Navy acquisition and future growth of NLCA

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Jul 2017 04:23

No problem.
2 hour wait before outrage submit is good. With Namo its 48 hour wait.

Venkiah Naidu 2 min!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Jul 2017 04:25

It's not Paki threat.
Folks laughed when I said 65 squadrons if we want to fight and win 2.5 front war.
It's coming.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 01 Jul 2017 05:49

Agreed, pakis individually stopped posing a threat after they lost in '65. In '71 it was just a revalidation. It's the joint threat. Also, given the terrain, and most importantly given our fear of China after '62 a repeat will be avoided at all costs, right from top level to the individual soldier level.
Now coming to your point about 65 squadrons, the quesiton i think of are if? how? and then when?

How is the easiest part, coz we have almost all the pieces in place now. Things can not go south from here (even after counting for HAL and production screw ups).
The question is if we have the desire/capability to have 65 sqdns? I am myself incapable of answering this question.
65 Sqdns:
Ignoring time and making some arbit assumptions we can have: 13 Su 30, 4 Raffie, 4 Mig 29, 4 Mirage 2000, 7 jags, ~6 Tejas=38 leaves a gap of 27 sqdns
Lets assume even if get 10 sqdns of F16, and 7 sqdns of FGFA, and 10 sqdns of AMCA.
Results in reasonable mix from operational PoV, but it will also require massive expansion in pilot force and thereby associated training infra as well. Perhaps dilution of entry standards.
The question is will we have enough money and will to operate this big AF which will be in top 4 (assuming US, Russia and China)

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 01 Jul 2017 05:52

ramana wrote:It's not Paki threat.
Folks laughed when I said 65 squadrons if we want to fight and win 2.5 front war.
It's coming.

??
Ramana ji you have upped the number of squadrons by 5, and fronts by .5

What's the other'half' front?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 01 Jul 2017 06:00

ArjunPandit wrote: 65 Sqdns:
Ignoring time and making some arbit assumptions we can have: 13 Su 30, 4 Raffie, 4 Mig 29, 4 Mirage 2000, 7 jags, ~6 Tejas=38 leaves a gap of 27 sqdns...

Today the order of 450 Tejas and 90 Tejas trainers should be placed. I remember German Swiss giant RuAG had offered assistance to hal but were ignored. Maybe Tata-Ruag can set up extra line ...

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 01 Jul 2017 07:20

01 July..
Flying Daggers has completed the first year of its service to nation. Wishing the Aviators, Engineers and the Airmen many more successful years of Tejas flying ahead..

srin · Post by **srin** » 01 Jul 2017 08:14

ramana wrote:It's not Paki threat.
Folks laughed when I said 65 squadrons if we want to fight and win 2.5 front war.
It's coming.

Officially, it is a 2-front war for IAF. The other .5 front (for COIN is mostly for IA). But in reality, we need to be ready for a 3-front war - Bangladesh can "turn" anytime (if the wrong begum comes to power) and threaten our flanks and the "chicken neck".

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Jul 2017 10:05

Look at point and area targets in TSP and China. Add IA and IN support roles. Now back calculate how many sorties are needed accounting for effectiveness. Add attrition rate. Then add margin for reserves to influence battle outcomes.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 Jul 2017 23:36

Cybaru wrote:Whaaat a beauty!!

That is a one gorgeous plane.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 Jul 2017 06:12

ramana wrote:
srai wrote: I would think that is a true statement.

The "official" second-line (i.e. technically third line) of 8 LCA assembly capacity will cost $203 million.
Second Production Line For India's Home-grown LCA Tejas For $203 Million
That's about 2.5 Guardian drones.

Or the cost of one Rafale.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 Jul 2017 08:52

Interesting tit-bit on LCA Mk1A. Existing prototypes will be upgraded to Mk1A standard. That means current SP Mk1 (IOC-2/FOC) standards would be upgradable too.

22 June at 07:20Karapattu R Sanjeev:
Tejas - LCA Sir, Any update on the Tejas Mk1A development

22 June at 08:39 Tejas - LCA:
It's gaining momentum now.

23 June at 00:11 Karapattu R Sanjeev:
Are you building a new Prototype for Tejas Mk1A or modifying any of the existing aircrafts?

23 June at 01:11 Tejas - LCA:
modifyong existing prototype makes more sense.

27 June at 00:45Ravi Gopalan Sir:
we havent seen reports of any engine orders for 404IN20, curious about HAL's plans to ramp up in time for MK1A

27 June at 01:50 Tejas - LCA:
The flight testing will have to happen first. Some of the existing prototypes will be modified to start with.

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 02 Jul 2017 12:08

Building MK1A will need gutting down some of the LSPs and re-building the innards from nose cone till the engine. The entire pilot facing surface will change. The entire 'jungle' under the spine also will change. It is major MAJOR work onlee.

Before that happens, the stuff that need to be mounted there must be ready. Delays do happen.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 Jul 2017 13:59

^^^

All depends on how much internal rearrangement has been designed. If they can do minimum that is required for better access to the identified areas/parts for maintenance, then the whole Mk1A may not be all that much extra work. But if they are planning to do as much as what you are implying then I don't think they can complete qualifications by 2020.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 02 Jul 2017 21:39

Dileep wrote:Building MK1A will need gutting down some of the LSPs and re-building the innards from nose cone till the engine. The entire pilot facing surface will change. The entire 'jungle' under the spine also will change. It is major MAJOR work onlee.

Before that happens, the stuff that need to be mounted there must be ready. Delays do happen.

Sh*t. Saar, last few times ju have wonlee posted such newj. Every now and again, do some appetizing bits too. No wonder they are looking for solah.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jul 2017 02:40

It's true. And cable harnesses have to remade for the relocated packages.
Making 3 D cable harnesses is a non-trivial task.

srai · Post by **srai** » 03 Jul 2017 05:19

Cain Marko wrote:
Dileep wrote:Building MK1A will need gutting down some of the LSPs and re-building the innards from nose cone till the engine. The entire pilot facing surface will change. The entire 'jungle' under the spine also will change. It is major MAJOR work onlee.

Before that happens, the stuff that need to be mounted there must be ready. Delays do happen.
Sh*t. Saar, last few times ju have wonlee posted such newj. Every now and again, do some appetizing bits too. No wonder they are looking for solah.

Arjun MBT redux. By the time Mk1A is ready, Mk1 production would have long ended. They are taking on too many changes in a short amount of time. Again, the work effort is being underestimated as well as the time required for qualifications. Doesn't look good for the future of LCA, IMO.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 03 Jul 2017 10:32

srai wrote:Interesting tit-bit on LCA Mk1A. Existing prototypes will be upgraded to Mk1A standard. That means current SP Mk1 (IOC-2/FOC) standards would be upgradable too

No. Briefly, prototypes can undergo Frankenstein surgeries which is almost similar to new build aircraft. Reason for modification is to save on administrative approval time & effort for new test planes.

Modifying SP-1-20 will require similar rebuild and not worth the effort that can be spent on new aircraft.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Jul 2017 10:54

how is the internal cable routing of a a.c done? some "layout" sw similar to that used in 3D routing of wires inside a chip?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 03 Jul 2017 11:47

Singha wrote:how is the internal cable routing of a a.c done? some "layout" sw similar to that used in 3D routing of wires inside a chip?

Of coarse there are SW available for preparing the wiring layouts, both commercial and inhouse (e.g. Saffron has one SW call eCentric). They are like CAD SW more or less. There are specialised companies doing this work. It quite a complicated task for bigger aircrafts and fighter jets. Highly man-hr intensive work. A few companies in BLR do such work. There have been known delays in 'years' for some Aircraft projects due to wiring. IIRC A380 was one of those, where a simple error of mismatch in versions of the SW used for creating these layouts set the project back by billions of dollars (at least that what they claim). Mitsubishi MRJ is also delayed due to wiring changes.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jul 2017 11:58

Singh Do download some recent aircraft cutaway dwgs and see how those black boxes are connected up. Such wiring is called cable harness. And in aircraft it is 3D and not just 2D.

mody · Post by **mody** » 03 Jul 2017 18:49

For LCA, its not merely about spending money to get the third assembly line started.
Currently all the suppliers of HAL and HAL itself for the components that it makes, have to ramp up production, so that a total of 11 aircrafts can be on the assembly line at any given time. Right now that's not the case.
We are not at that stage as yet. My guess is that we probably might be having 5-8 aircraft on the first assembly line and 1 on the 0.5 assembly line.
Once SP5 rolls of the 0.5 assembly line, they will be confident enough to use all the 3 slots on the 0.5 assembly line and ramp up production.

Also, remember that only 40 MK1 planes to be made. Setting up an additional assembly line for 8 more aircrafts that will only lie idle, doesn't make much sense. The second line of 8 assembly slots will come online, when MK1A is ready. Offcourse the line should be ready before that.
From the existing 1.5 assembly line itself, HAL might be able to produce upto 12 aircrafts per year.
Right now, the main focus should be on the following:

1). ADA achieving FoC for MK1.
2). HAL stabilizing the production, so that from 2018 onwards, they are able to produce 10-12 aircrafts per year.
3). ADA and HAL going after MK1A on war footing and targeting 2020 as the start of full scale production, with 2.5 assembly lines, producing 20 planes per year from 2021 onwards.

Without development of MK1A, we simply cannot ramp up production right now. The additional assembly line at this point in time would make sense, only if IAF and MoD decide to increase the number of MK1 planes to 60 from the current 40.

jayasimha · Post by **jayasimha** » 03 Jul 2017 18:57

ramana wrote:Singh Do download some recent aircraft cutaway dwgs and see how those black boxes are connected up. Such wiring is called cable harness. And in aircraft it is 3D and not just 2D.

like these i think..

http://www.sasmos.com/Harnesses.html

chola · Post by **chola** » 03 Jul 2017 19:12

mody wrote:For LCA, its not merely about spending money to get the third assembly line started.
Currently all the suppliers of HAL and HAL itself for the components that it makes, have to ramp up production, so that a total of 11 aircrafts can be on the assembly line at any given time. Right now that's not the case.

Does anyone else find it amazing that after decades of indigenizing hundreds upon hundreds of MiGs and Sukhois, HAL and its supporting suppliers do not have the capacity to make a dozen indigenous fighters per year?

What use is indigenizing 70% of the MKI or anything else if it did not create intrinsic capacity for our aviation eco-system? The LCA has been flying since 2001 and no one at HAL had planned for production during all this time?

Sorry, the babudom at HAL is dug-in, entrenched and impossible to extract and fix. Give Tata and the private sector a chance. Even if it means letting them partner with Amreekis and introducing the F-solah.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 03 Jul 2017 19:17

Can't HAL keep on producing the MK1 planes on its own, I am sure it can bear with the carry cost, with nothing in sight IAF wont mind a plane. I am sure payments can be sorted out over time.
For IAF an inferior plane should be preferable to no plane

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 03 Jul 2017 19:28

Chola, just threaten these babus to withhold their salaries, and see how they will be working like clockwork to get the planes of high quality

srai · Post by **srai** » 03 Jul 2017 19:54

ArjunPandit wrote:Can't HAL keep on producing the MK1 planes on its own, I am sure it can bear with the carry cost, with nothing in sight IAF wont mind a plane. I am sure payments can be sorted out over time.
For IAF an inferior plane should be preferable to no plane

From a risk-mitigation point of view, the assembly line should continue to produce Mk1 until the Mk1A becomes ready and then gradually switch over. That may mean additional one-or-two year production run for Mk1.

chola · Post by **chola** » 03 Jul 2017 20:33

ArjunPandit wrote:Can't HAL keep on producing the MK1 planes on its own, I am sure it can bear with the carry cost, with nothing in sight IAF wont mind a plane. I am sure payments can be sorted out over time.
For IAF an inferior plane should be preferable to no plane

It is not making them on their own, Saar!

Why do people say that? IAF has agree on taking six squadrons (120) MK1 in October 2015. The IAF has accepted LSP-1 that same year without weapons or even a productuon radar.

MoD is has ordered the planes and the IAF has supported by accepting the orders. What more can they do? Is the IAF supposed to buy and project manage HAL's production process too?!

The reason we are having this single-engine tender is because 45 Squadron has literally less than a handful of aircraft delivered after two years. MoD is not out to kill LCA. It has ordered over 120 including the LSPs. But it needs to meet the IAF's needs too within a reasonable time frame.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Jul 2017 21:04

ArjunPandit wrote:Chola, just threaten these babus to withhold their salaries, and see how they will be working like clockwork to get the planes of high quality

LOL With respect - this is what we are taught because this happens maybe in Amreeka.

In Indian government jobs when one employee is punished the whole factory will go on strike. The MD of the factory - also a babu will come under pressure from the politician to settle the issue or the politician will lose votes. If the MD does not comply there will be gharao and he will later be transferred.

A doctor friend of mine, my senior at medical college who later became Chief Medical Officer of a major "navratna" defence PSU was slapped by a "class 4 employee" when I was a medical student in a central government run medical college in Pondicherry . We all cheerfully went on strike for this guy and gheraoed the director and did the usual stuff including hunger strike etc. It all ended with a whimper when the aggrieved chap we were fighting for was made to say "I forgive him".

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 03 Jul 2017 21:24

No shiv saar, I have seen that happening in PSU banks. My father who retired from a PS bank, where CBS was not moving at a snail's pace. Results would start showing when CMDs would threaten the branch managers with stopping salary all the people getting it done.
If the govt becomes ruthless, then in the end even with these labor unions will have to fall in line. Speaking from my limited experience only.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Jul 2017 22:07

AP, Did HAL get funds to develop supply chain or funded for JIT? It starts from top. Finance Ministry is the key obstacle. Lot of competing demands for scarce resources. And banks are trained for that. When a new minister comes and gets the funds they don't know how to spend. Till 3 years ago another scam was UP A would allocate lots of money with understanding it won't be spent and returned. A PR stunt under clean mumdu.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 04 Jul 2017 00:18

ramana wrote:Till 3 years ago another scam was UPA would allocate lots of money with understanding it won't be spent and returned. A PR stunt under clean mumdu.

This was one of the major reasons for delay in Project 71 IAC. Sadly visionaries and persons of action are few in Indian Leadership and Manohar Parrikar is badly missed. Somehow Goa having a higher priority than Defence of our nation just shows our horribly skewed sense of priority.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 04 Jul 2017 00:47

srai wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:Can't HAL keep on producing the MK1 planes on its own, I am sure it can bear with the carry cost, with nothing in sight IAF wont mind a plane. I am sure payments can be sorted out over time.
For IAF an inferior plane should be preferable to no plane
From a risk-mitigation point of view, the assembly line should continue to produce Mk1 until the Mk1A becomes ready and then gradually switch over. That may mean additional one-or-two year production run for Mk1.

If one goes by the murmurs, there is an attempt to convert the 20 FOC order to Mk1A..
It's quite ambitious, all power to HAL to deliver on it !

I was digging for information on the permanent waivers granted, and came across a CAG audit report.
It makes for very sorry reading.

Considering what has happened over the years, the 83 mk1A orders are nothing but an act of God and Mr.Parrikar an agent of God who made it happen. 108 pranaams to man !

The order for IOC 20 was placed in 2006 and FOC 20 in 2010. By the UPA goberment !!
The observation of CAG on failure by HAL to setup a production line were pretty damning.

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&sourc ... fxAYXW6V5g

http://www.cag.gov.in/content/report-no ... ght-combat

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jul 2017 01:12

Did MoD give the funds to HAL to setup the line?

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 04 Jul 2017 01:34

ramana wrote:Did MoD give the funds to HAL to setup the line?

Quoting from the report.

4.3.1 Delay in creation of production facilities: Audit observed that HAL had been utilizing the existing facilities available with it for manufacture of LCA. Even though HAL initiated action in April 2006 to form a dedicated LCA facility, LCA Project Group was established as a full-fledged Division only in March 2014 as seen from HAL’s 371st Board Meeting papers. MoU of 2002 sanctioned `391.18 crore towards creation of facility i.e. Capital4 expenditure Rs. 188.71 crore and DRE5 `202.47 crore.Audit noticed that as of March 2014, HAL had incurred an amount of `118.99 crore (63 per cent) towards capital expenditure and `139.12 crore (69 per cent) towards DRE.
When reasons for delay in creation of manufacturing facility was enquired (October 2014) in audit, HAL stated (November 2014) that extensive changes in the design and development post 2006 had resulted in reviewing the facility requirement and a capacity augmentation plan was being put up for meeting the objectives. It was also stated that non-finalisation of configuration of LCA had led to the postponement of establishment of production facilities. Reply is not acceptable as the GoI sanction of November 2001 stipulated that the facilities for manufacture of eight LCA were to be created and the first LCA was to be delivered within 4 ½ years from the date of sanction i.e. by May 2006. Further, the delay in creation of manufacturing facility of eight aircraft per annum impacted the production of LSPs, as discussed in Para 4.3.4 as well as the Series Production Aircraft.

4 5 Capital expenditure consists of expenditure towards Plant & machinery and civil works. Deferred Revenue Expenditure (DRE) consists of expenditure towards tooling, test equipments, technical assistance, training, project management, publications and long and

The above states money was sanctioned and utilised too, albeit at a very slow rate. From 2002-2014.

Edit-
One thing that caught my eye in the report.
The flying daggers won't have much trouble with spares.

HAL expeditedly delivered about 100 crores worth of spares upto March 14 which could be used only after the squadron got equipped with the jets !

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 04 Jul 2017 02:01

Some geek bhai must have this info. Please helep karo !!
Please copy and paste. I just want to know if the
1. aircraft is retired
2. working with HAL/ ADA team
3. with Daggers @ IAF
4. with ASTE @ IAF

This is for IAF Tejas only.

Technology Demonstrators (TD)
TD-1 (KH2001) - Retired ?
TD-2 (KH2002) - Retired ?

Prototype Vehicles (PV)
PV-1 (KH2003) - Retired ?
PV-2 (KH2004) - Retired ?
PV-3 (KH2005) - Retired ?
PV-4 ? never Built ?
PV-5 (KH-T2009) - with HAL ?
PV-6 (KH-T2010) - with HAL ?

Limited Series Production
LSP-1 (KH2011) - with HAL ?
LSP-2 (KH2012) - with HAL ?
LSP-3 (KH2013) - with HAL ?
LSP-4 (KH2014) - with HAL ?
LSP-6 – Not built.[151]
LSP-7 (KH2017) – - with HAL ?
LSP-8 – - with HAL ?

Series Production
SP-1 - with Daggers @ IAF
SP-2 - with Daggers @ IAF
SP-3 - with ?
SP-4 - with ?
SP-5 - with ?
SP-6 - built and destined for Daggers @ IAF

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 04 Jul 2017 02:12

Sir SP-3 and SP-4 are with the squadron.

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Jul 2017 05:48

Khalsa wrote:Some geek bhai must have this info. Please helep karo !!
Please copy and paste. I just want to know if the
1. aircraft is retired
2. working with HAL/ ADA team
3. with Daggers @ IAF
4. with ASTE @ IAF

This is for IAF Tejas only.

Technology Demonstrators (TD)
TD-1 (KH2001) - Retired ?
TD-2 (KH2002) - Retired ?

Prototype Vehicles (PV)
PV-1 (KH2003) - Retired ?
PV-2 (KH2004) - Retired ?
PV-3 (KH2005) - Retired ?
PV-4 ? never Built ?
PV-5 (KH-T2009) - with HAL ?
PV-6 (KH-T2010) - with HAL ?

Limited Series Production
LSP-1 (KH2011) - with HAL ?
LSP-2 (KH2012) - with HAL ?
LSP-3 (KH2013) - with HAL ?
LSP-4 (KH2014) - with HAL ?
LSP-6 – Not built.[151]
LSP-7 (KH2017) – - with HAL ?
LSP-8 – - with HAL ?

Series Production
SP-1 - with Daggers @ IAF
SP-2 - with Daggers @ IAF
SP-3 - with ?
SP-4 - with ?
SP-5 - with ?
SP-6 - built and destined for Daggers @ IAF

Some answers here: https://www.ada.gov.in/images/flighttestnews.htm

https://www.ada.gov.in/images/Annual%20 ... 015-16.pdf

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jul 2017 12:21

It's a tribute to the care that the LCA program has taken for the test flights. Shows their dedication.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 04 Jul 2017 13:01

ramana wrote:It's a tribute to the care that the LCA program has taken for the test flights. Shows their dedication.

And perhaps shows their fear too, for what would happen if there would be some failure or mishap during flight testing.

We just saw a demonstration with the new rifle made by OFB. It was termed a failure even before the actual user trials started and was "lynched" by MSM including some folks who you would expect to know better. Saras is another living example.