LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

[Akshay Kapoor]

And these are EAC and CAC AF bases also known as AFS. Deejay has a lot of experince in EAC and can tell us which ones can be used for tejas.


Eastern Air Command
Agartala AFS VEAT 18/36 48 ft / 14 m Tripura
Bagdogra AFS VEBD 18/36 412 ft / 125 m West Bengal 20 Wing
Barapani AFS
Shillong VEBI 04/22 2910 ft / 886 m Meghalaya
Barrackpore AFS VEBR 02/20 18 ft / 5 m West Bengal 6 Wing
Chabua AFS
Dibrugarh VECA 05/23 350 ft / 107 m Assam 14 Wing
Dum Dum AFS
Kolkata VECC 01L/19R
01R/19L 17 ft / 5 m West Bengal
Hasimara AFS
Jalpaiguri 11L/29R
11R/29L 340 ft /104 m West Bengal 16 Wing, 22 Squadron, 222 Squadron, (both with MIG-27), 791 SU.
Jorhat AFS VEJT 04/22 284 ft / 87 m Assam 10 Wing
Kalaikunda AFS 17/35 200 ft / 60 m West Bengal 5th Wing(Sqdn18 with MiG27s & OCU with MiG21s)
Kumbhigram AFS
Silchar VEKU 06/24 352 ft / 107 m Assam 22 Wing
Mohanbari AFS
Dibrugarh VEMN 05/23 361 ft / 110 m Assam 42 Wing
Mountain Shadow AFS
Guwahati VEGT 05/23 350 ft / 107 m Assam
Tawang AFS 8,756 ft / 2,669 m Arunachal Pradesh
Tezpur AFS VETZ 04/22 240 ft / 73 m Assam 11 Wing
Panagarh AFS VEPH 15/33 240 ft / 73 m West Bengal 62 SU
Central Air Command
Agra AFS **** 05/23
12/30 551 ft 167 m Uttar Pradesh 4 Wing
Bihta AFS 07/25 52 ft 170 m Bihar
Darbhanga AFS VEDB 14/28 21 ft / 38 m Bihar
Bakshi Ka Talab AFS
Bakshi Ka Talab, near Lucknow VIBL 09/27 385 ft/ 117 m Uttar Pradesh
Bamrauli AFS
Allahabad VEAB 06/24
12/30 322 ft/ 98 m Uttar Pradesh 29 Wing
Bareilly AFS VIBY 11/29 565 ft/ 172 m Uttar Pradesh 15 Wing
Chakeri AFS
Kanpur VICX 01/19
09/27 410 ft/124 m Uttar Pradesh
Gorakhpur AFS VEGK 11/29 259 ft / 78 m Uttar Pradesh 17 Wing
Maharajpur AFS
Gwalior VIGR 06/24 617 ft / 188 m Madhya Pradesh 40 Wing

[shiv]

Ve-ry interesting

From Tuting, the Chinese military centre of Nyingchi is within 200 km

From Tawang -Shannan comes within range

From Gangtok - Xigaze is just of reach but a single refueling within India will put Xigaze in the LCAs cross hairs. A border airfield maybe?

From Nyoma - Ngari is well well within range

The LCA is small and stealthy and all missions over Tibet are necessarily flown above 15,000 feet.

And with a centre line fuel tank 250 KM should be okay.

Only for Pakjab and Singh would lo-lo attacks be close to sea level. Tibet is all over 4000 -4500 meters. One thing we do not talk about is the LCA's stealth factor. The other "unknown" for me is the payload that the LCA would be to take from say Gangtok aiport which is at 1400 meters altitude.

2 LGBs and a tank would put Xigaze (Lhasa airport) in range from Gangtok.

Basically the entire border logistics route can be covered by the LCA

[Akshay Kapoor]

And with a centre line fuel tank 250 KM should be okay.

Only for Pakjab and Singh would lo-lo attacks be close to sea level. Tibet is all over 4000 -4500 meters. One thing we do not talk about is the LCA's stealth factor. The other "unknown" for me is the payload that the LCA would be to take from say Gangtok aiport which is at 1400 meters altitude.

2 LGBs and a tank would put Xigaze (Lhasa airport) in range from Gangtok.

Basically the entire border logistics route can be covered by the LCA

lets talk stealth then. pls expound on it. Also I dont think we have AFS at Gantok and Tawang. Gantok airport is being constructed but can fighters fly from there ? What baout Nyoma ALG ?

[Akshay Kapoor]

found this online...

Posted : Oct 2 2010 12:00PM | Updated: Mar 13 2015 6:25PM



New Delhi, Oct 1: India will upgrade IAF's Nyoma advanced landing ground (ALG) in Ladakh into a full-fledged air base closer to the borders with China to deploy its top-notch fighter jets including the Sukhois there.
The proposal for modernising the compact airstrip at Nyoma, just 23 km from Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China, has gone to the Defence Ministry for approval, IAF's Western Air Command chief Air Marshal N A K Browne told a press conference here today.
"Nyoma ALG is to be expanded into a major base and a proposal in this regard has been sent to the government. It is being currently examined actively by the Defence Ministry. If the approval comes today, it would take about four years to get it ready as a major base," Browne said.
"When we look at developing a base, in our view we have to be able to operate each and every platform of the Air Force at that base. It will not be confined to one or two types of aircraft alone," he said to a query if Sukhois could be deployed there permanently.
"We have to be able to operate (from Nyoma) fully with all our capabilities....So fighter aircraft is part of the air force inventory," he said, explaining that all modern fighter planes of the IAF fleet were capable of operating from the 13,300-feet altitude airbase.
IAF had activated Nyoma in September last year when an AN-32 medium lift transport aircraft landed on the hitherto unused airstrip.
In the last two years, IAF has activated three such airstrips.
The other two ALG activated in 2008 are Daulat Beg Oldi at 16,200-feet altitude and Fukche at 13,000 feet much closer to the LAC.
Though the IAF had claimed that the activation of the three airstrips was for providing transport link to remote parts of Ladakh to promote tourism, it is a well-known fact that the ALGs enhance the armed forces' capability to lift troops to the LAC much faster now.
However, Browne said no other ALGs would be developed any time soon, including Chushul in Ladakh that was being considered earlier.

Lets hope this proposal has been approved by MoD. If we could only remove MoD amd Finance Ministry from most of this approvals and sanctions we would do a sterling service to future generations.

[Karan M]

There is a simple way to get more LCAs. Let MOD raise the squadron cap and fund the IAFs acquisition of more units. Thats the PRC approach. They fund the J-11, J-7 AND J-10 plus other acquisitions.

Perhaps the first step for that we need ahem...a defence minister ! Also our defence budget is 1.7% of GDP and Pak is 3.6% of GDP not including funding from America. Sorry Karan, desh does not have appetite nor will for national security.

you are right. our national attitude seems to be only for maintaining the status quo. i still believe though, iterative advances can move the stature far ahead. eg privatization or supplanting OFB ammo.

[deejay]

The present ALGs in Arunachal are unfit for fighter Ops. More to do we runway length. I think Mechuka may just be able to handle fighters. Tutting can possibly with some enhancements.

Gangtok, seems difficult unless we pull out a rabbit. We may look at places North of Gangtok, post Chaten and Chungthang, as the land loses its greenery, we may have flat patched at around 4kms there for some fixed wing ops.

Tawang, so far no fixed wing operations. Same story for Shillong and Jalpaiguri but the Japaiguri area has Bagdogra so not needed and Shillong too is not essential.

CAC, all bases are go and active except Darbhanga which is a small strip.

[Akshay Kapoor]

Perhaps the first step for that we need ahem...a defence minister ! Also our defence budget is 1.7% of GDP and Pak is 3.6% of GDP not including funding from America. Sorry Karan, desh does not have appetite nor will for national security.

you are right. our national attitude seems to be only for maintaining the status quo. i still believe though, iterative advances can move the stature far ahead. eg privatization or supplanting OFB ammo.

Agree 100 %

[Karan M]

Rotary wing with IA makes sense but not fixed wing. For one we already have a very long tradition on helicopter pilots in the army with the artillery Air Observation pilots. That lead to the AAC as we know it today. Till very recently all AAC pilots were volunteers from other arms and had ground combat experience which was very useful in the AAC role. I sincerley hope its still the case. They would then go onto command infantry brigades, divs and be available to become army commanders. But fixed wing is different. Even if IAF trains them and we resolve the infrastructure issues there are massive ethos issues - by taking them away from the pool of their professional counterparts we would be hurting their long term training and upgrading of skills. How will we manage their careers, why deprive IAF of some of the best of them to command large Air Force Bases, higher command etc. What about ground support, atc, engineers, airbases etc ? And tactics - what about support to Army LCA strike package ? What if multiple type strike package is needed ie LCA and Mirages ?

We already have IAF officers embedded in staff from Corps HQ onwards to facilitate joint planning and execution of air land battle. This needs to be strengthened and taken to the logical conclusion of theatre commanders.

Well, the claim by USMC guys is their ethos is differnet because they are completely focused on supporting USMC operations and are "airpower on call" versus USAF which is a brother service but has its own priorities and requirements.

Having said that, the logistics issues you mention are all true & there are many other items to fix rather than creating a second AF in the IA. Better to do what you said & implement IAF officers being integrated better with IA units & give IAF enough resources so it does not have to divert any from equally pressing tasks.

[srai]

There is a simple way to get more LCAs. Let MOD raise the squadron cap and fund the IAFs acquisition of more units. Thats the PRC approach. They fund the J-11, J-7 AND J-10 plus other acquisitions.

Perhaps the first step for that we need ahem...a defence minister ! Also our defence budget is 1.7% of GDP and Pak is 3.6% of GDP not including funding from America. Sorry Karan, desh does not have appetite nor will for national security.

The numbers don't add up. With all the new acquisitions planned by all three services, how is the current and foreseeable defense budget able to cater for all these competing requests? Doesn't make sense. This is another reason why major import acquisitions get delayed. Shift the headache to the next government.

[fanne]

Are we running in circles here? 123 order is a done deal (or is there a doubt that it can be rolled back?). HAL from all news is trying hard to scale up but falling short. MOD responsible for making these 123 (MK vs MK1, different imported engines, radars-2032 vs 2052) happen is sleeping at the wheels (lack of full time DM, why not a empowered person/committee to just look up at this, just as N powered subs program are being run). The last mile requirement - refueling (which makes sense, if the useful range is only 200 km, it is useful but not that much, but we have to add more refuelers, maintenance are all right ask. HAL as usual reluctantly works on LCA, look at their innovative approach on the HJT-36/40, they are moving mountains to make it happen.
We are so short of fighters that single engine MMCRA and LCA both can exist in number. I think the miss is on part of leadership (MOD/IAF/HAL) - I think mainly because it is new territory for us - Our own indigenous plane!! An import would be fine, we have imported 100 times, the process is known, the planes are certified, HAL has to just tighten the screw, MOD has to just make the right deal and throw the right amount of money. Making your own plane takes a different approach. You may have to induct something that is unusable, but IAF till now has always inducted that is mature (though it may have got tricked by SU30MKI or MIg 29K) and mature it over time. MOD/HAL have to arrange OEMs for this, which needs a larger number of order to set up shop, but numbers wont come till the plane is certified (catch 22 eh). It needs other host of things to make it successful, armaments!!
With Indian radar (Uttam) what missiles it will fire? are they ready? With 2052/2032 we do get a suite of armaments. If we put refueling on this, and procure in numbers and use them, 6 refuelers will not cut it.
I think this puzzle of homegrown product/figher has to be solved

[shiv]

I must not talk about apples and compare with oranges. Air Marshal Rajkumar had written semi-jokingly about taking off in a fully loaded Jaguar on a hot summer day from Bengaluru at 900 plus meters as being a hair raising experience. An LCA I expect will have lesser wing loading that I think will lead to better performance from hi altitude fields. Still a 3-4 km runway would help. Everything north of Assam and North Bengal and Sikkim are in the foothills and looks like all airstrips are 1000 meters plus.

[Karan M]

Perhaps the first step for that we need ahem...a defence minister ! Also our defence budget is 1.7% of GDP and Pak is 3.6% of GDP not including funding from America. Sorry Karan, desh does not have appetite nor will for national security.

The numbers don't add up. With all the new acquisitions planned by all three services, how is the current and foreseeable defense budget able to cater for all these competing requests? Doesn't make sense. This is another reason why major import acquisitions get delayed. Shift the headache to the next government.

It doesn't, which matches what Akshay is saying about raising the overall cap.

The usual trick is to slash revenue & capex budget and then also state "extra funds will be earmarked as appropriate".
So far, in UPA times, the trick was to project huge numbers, get some clearance, start farcical trials, and then delay the purchase leaving services hanging & return the unspent money to MOF. VK Singh openly called this out (the man, is all brass & took on GOI.. he too was called a traitor by our wannabe thugs for taking on baboons).

Similarly, HAL etc would run up notional profits. Not invest in Capex or R&D and return it as dividend to GOI or earn interest off of large deposits parked & show it as successful margin generation to MOD. It was all a giant scam.

In current GOI, one supposed advantage of Jetli wearing 2 hats, is that both MOD & MOF report to the same hierarchy & hence MOF clearance will be honest & fake delays wont be introduced.

Supposed because on the one hand big ticket deals have got done (Akash, BMP2 TI sights). But on the other hand the IAF faced a shortfall in both Revenue & Capital budgets earlier this year when i checked.

Jetli has to balance populist stuff (farm loan waivers), actual needs & the parlous state of defence (hollowed over the past decade).

So that alone tells me this MII Single engine fighter deal is going nowhere for a fair amount of time.. no matter how much our f-solaah supporters want it to happen.

[Rakesh]

Akshay: Thank you for the informative post, which created a flurry of equally informative posts between you and Karan. I just have one comment - on this issue of labelling the IAF (and Army) as import pasand, I have to say the following;

- The navy gets the least funding of all the three services. But yet the Indian Naval Design Bureau have managed to do what the other two services have yet to master. An great example of this would be the Visakhapatnam Class destroyer (Project 15B) which has its design history in the Kolkata Class destroyer (Project 15A) which has its design history in the Delhi Class destroyer (Project 15) which has its design history in the Godavari Class frigate and the Rajput Class destroyer. One can go even further back...but I am sure you get the idea.

- What lesson has the navy learnt from this? That you start small (Godavari Class frigate) and then go big (Visakhapatnam Class destroyer). The IAF and the Army appear to be wanting big from the very get go. Basically from crawl stage they want BIG. How is that even possible? Another example of this would be the very deadly Python-5 missile from Israel. Its forefather was the Shafrir-1, a dismal missle by even Israeli standards. But that did not stop them from developing and refinining their product. Another perfect example would the Merkava tank - again from Israel. Just follow the development of it - from Merkava 1 to the Merkava IV of today. Vast difference.

- There is another key point and that was there in the very first point I made - the Indian Naval Design Bureau. Is there a comparable institution to that in the IAF or the Army? Is there one? Perhaps I just do not know, so someone please enlighten me if there is one. If there is not one, why is there not? Is it because there is a lack of vision in the IAF and the Army? Or they do just not care? What is it about the navy that saw that vision - the value of a local product - that the IAF and the Army did not see?

Import Pasand may hurt the sentiments of uninformed posters, but it appears to be an apt term. The Govt, the MoD, the Babu and the two services (Army and IAF) are ALL TO BLAME for the mess of zero innovation.

[Rakesh]

It makes absolutely no sense to have fixed wing with IA, from an training, ethos, logistics, and tactics perspective. It makes a lot of sense to have theatre commands with integrated command and control but not to have strike aircraft manned by IA.

Since you mentioned this, I am wondering why does the IAF need attack helicopters in the Mi-25/35 and AH-64 class? Troop support and the destruction of enemy armoured vehicles is the domain of the Army, no?

[Manish_P]

Rakesk Ji

The Mi-25/35 and AH-64 class are very good at Troop support and the destruction of enemy armoured vehicles. So many lovely videos about it on youtube.

What they are also very good at is suppression/destruction of radar installations (you would recollect that it was the Apaches which fired some of the earliest shots of the Gulf war destroying radar sites and the other aircraft poured in through the gaps (even the stealthy F117As)

And with the drones age upon us they are (currently) one of the most efficient platforms to intercept and knock them out

[Rakesh]

Both great reasons for the AH-64 in the IAF. I did not know that, so thank you.

[Manish_Sharma]

Why is it that the F-16 and the Gripen both participated in the MMRCA (Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft) competition, but yet they are now contendors for the single engine, light category?

AFF (Any Foreign Fighter) "Syndrome"

a.) Gripen and f16 both "medium" category competing in MMRCA.

b.) Only now grippen E has flown but both Parrikar ji & Raha ji mentioned it last year, while when reporter asked about Tejas Mk2 Raha ji refused to speaking about 'categorywise' for Tejas.

c.) Now both "MMRCAs" have been sneaked in Tejas category with cunning change of expression "Single Engine Competition".

As it is the main thing is "Any Foreign Fighter"

[brar_w]

I don't think the Single Engine Fighter Program specifies a weight class. If they were looking for a light single engine fighter, SAAB would have offered the much cheaper and smaller Gripen-C and made the entire program even more pointless given that a domestic fighter in that class is not only in production but operational

[Akshay Kapoor]

Akshay: Thank you for the informative post, which created a flurry of equally informative posts between you and Karan. I just have one comment - on this issue of labelling the IAF (and Army) as import pasand, I have to say the following;

- The navy gets the least funding of all the three services. But yet the Indian Naval Design Bureau have managed to do what the other two services have yet to master. An great example of this would be the Visakhapatnam Class destroyer (Project 15B) which has its design history in the Kolkata Class destroyer (Project 15A) which has its design history in the Delhi Class destroyer (Project 15) which has its design history in the Godavari Class frigate and the Rajput Class destroyer. One can go even further back...but I am sure you get the idea.

- What lesson has the navy learnt from this? That you start small (Godavari Class frigate) and then go big (Visakhapatnam Class destroyer). The IAF and the Army appear to be wanting big from the very get go. Basically from crawl stage they want BIG. How is that even possible? Another example of this would be the very deadly Python-5 missile from Israel. Its forefather was the Shafrir-1, a dismal missle by even Israeli standards. But that did not stop them from developing and refinining their product. Another perfect example would the Merkava tank - again from Israel. Just follow the development of it - from Merkava 1 to the Merkava IV of today. Vast difference.

- There is another key point and that was there in the very first point I made - the Indian Naval Design Bureau. Is there a comparable institution to that in the IAF or the Army? Is there one? Perhaps I just do not know, so someone please enlighten me if there is one. If there is not one, why is there not? Is it because there is a lack of vision in the IAF and the Army? Or they do just not care? What is it about the navy that saw that vision - the value of a local product - that the IAF and the Army did not see?

Import Pasand may hurt the sentiments of uninformed posters, but it appears to be an apt term. The Govt, the MoD, the Babu and the two services (Army and IAF) are ALL TO BLAME for the mess of zero innovation.

Rakesh you are a webmaster so I am surprised that you don't know or national defence works and what powers the armed forces have and not. I have posted several times on this over the years but no one bothers to listen.

1. All sanctions come from the MOD and after that MOF. No Mod sanction is valid without MOF approval. The army cannot hire one more sepoy without sanction forget sanctioning a design beareu. Boss even the number of eggs you get is on sanction. A good quarter master and CO have to do all kinds of shenanigans to sort that out if there is a problem. In my own unit we had to use regimental funds to buy food for troops and set up a cooler room where troops with high fever could be rested. The ASC contractors are so powerful in defence ministry that even a GOC n C has no aukad to reject substandard food consistently.

I remember reading somewhere that a AOC n C designed some really good bombs in his garage or something and did not have financial authority to get his vast workshop complexes test them and produce prototypes. DRDO Would get angry. He had to go to DRDO and I don't know what happened. Read up on this.

I have posted several times that Kalyani Bharat 52 was offered to be teased by the army and the MOD ****** the army for having the temerity to allow that without routing stuff through them.

2. Navy - Capt Lohana who was one of the first DGND ie Director General Naval Design was a close family friend. When I was a youngster he told me several times that 'we kept the DRDO far way from the navy that's why we had success'. He also told me that NPOL had made some excellent sonars but after that they rested on their laurels.

I have posted before my dear friend Commander Dheeraj Khanna was part of WESSE and testing the Kolkata for electrical compliance. BEL made stuff was terrible and he was pressured to pass a lot of stuff and refused. He resigned after that.

Navy has had success no doubt but only on the float component. Move and fight are still problems.

Our problem is not design atleast as far as army is concerned. It's production. There was a lot of goodwill for INSAS when it was inducted and all kinds of stories on how a jeep went over it in testing and it didn't fail. But production let us down. I can't recount several stories.

Form the army perspective atleast we would trade robustness for ultra tech any day. A reliable system that does 80 pct of the job is fine as long as I know exactly how it will behave in all circumstances because then I can train for it and have appropriate tactics. The problem comes when the bloody thing does not work. And more hi tech the higher chance of a ****** up. Our problem is not design. It's mass production. Over time DRDO has done a decent job. LCA is great example. But sad to say we haven't been able to productionise it properly.

[Rakesh]

Brar, the argument being made is that a light fighter is absolutely necessary to build IAF numbers. The irony is that both aircraft participated in a medium fighter competition and both lost. All of a sudden they become light fighters?

[Akshay Kapoor]

Lastly even from a manpower perspective it's better to have more robust rather than hi tech stuff in army. Our troops are not as educated and frankly (I'm old school here) neither do we want them to be. So rather than getting a very complex system I would prefer a reliable and simple to use system any day. We have never lost a war for not having the most sexy equipment. We have lost because of tactical mistakes , huge strategic ****** ups and lack of ammunition and logistics. Army has always enjoyed fighting with robust weapons. Give the armed forces financial power and complete autonomy and I guarantee you will see leaps and bound changes in indegenisiaon. Criticise them after that if they don't deliver.

[Rakesh]

Akshay Saar: on the webmaster comment.

But if - as your good friend Captain Lohana said - keeping DRDO far away from the Navy brought them success, could not the Army and the IAF do the same? Is the Navy drinking a magic potion that the Army and IAF do not have access to?

The navy may be successful only in the surface fleet area, but it is a huge achievement over the other two services.

[nirav]

The single engined fighter competition is to make up for the shortfall caused by just ordering 36 Rafales.

Capability wise, Gripen or the Solah are lesser compared to the Rafale.
The LCA meanwhile, capability wise is at the bottom of the above list


LCA was never a mmrca contender.

By selecting 100 odd Solah or Gripen, IAF is already making a compromise capability wise.

LCA order book is steady at 123 jets. That will increase only when the delivery is done in an acceptable time bound manner.

Just because Solah, Gripen,LCA are single engined doesn't mean they are the same type with equal capability.

It's surprising, tenured posters do not acknowledge this basic fact.

[Akshay Kapoor]

Capt Lohana was not my friend he was even senior to my dad. He was a pioneer in DGND. Great man. Father in law of that famous chef something Kapoor

[Rakesh]

nirav: you are like the uninvinted uncle who comes over for Diwali dinner and embarrasses himself through flatulence and false baravado. Go away dude or be quiet. Stop trolling!

[Akshay Kapoor]

Loved his old monk and spoke fluent Rissian.

[Manish_Sharma]

@AK thank you very much for the post. Clears up many things incl the narrative about IAF a being import pasand. So it's not the IAF but the MOD and it's various arms that are preventing the scale up and deployment.

Wrong, Grippen E with same engine as Tejas Mk2 : GE414 can't defy laws of physics and outperform Tejas Mk2 in radius or other parameters.

AFF

[nirav]

nirav: you are like the uninvinted uncle who comes over for Diwali dinner and embarrasses himself through flatulence and false baravado. Go away dude or be quiet. Stop trolling!

You are the one who is trolling all threads with why single engined fighter,not LCA.

I'm merely responding.
Whenever I make a post you respond with ad hominem.

[Akshay Kapoor]

Akshay Saar: on the webmaster comment.

But if - as your good friend Captain Lohana said - keeping DRDO far away from the Navy brought them success, could not the Army and the IAF do the same? Is the Navy drinking a magic potion that the Army and IAF do not have access to?

The navy may be successful only in the surface fleet area, but it is a huge achievement over the other two services.

Admiral sir , didn't have badams today ? Didn't expect this mistake from you - confusing float component with surface fleet !! Float means the ability of a vessel to float ie hull, steel etc. Navy has been very succeasful in indigenisation. 100 Pct. then comes move - ie engines , transmissions , electrical etc. About 50 pct here. And then fight - sensors and shooters. Very little success here. But from Karan retire posts on other threads long term good news for all radars across spectrum of forces is coming.

[brar_w]

Brar, the argument being made is that a light fighter is absolutely necessary to build IAF numbers. The irony is that both aircraft participated in a medium fighter competition and both lost. All of a sudden they become light fighters?

I don’t read it this way. Both as being offered fit the parameters of the mmrca. I’ve always read this as a realization that picking the best technical performer was not an affordable strategy to acquiring triple digit fleet and that they want the 70% solution which often is closer to half the price. Keep in mind that when Nammo intervened the cost estimated being reported for 126 Rafael’s with Production and offsets was above $20 billion and hence the acquisition strategy unsustainable. Officially they have used the Single Engine Fighter Nomenclature and from what I have read avoided the light label. This likely indicates that they wanted the two lowest cost MMRCA contenders to compete.

[nirav]

@AK thank you very much for the post. Clears up many things incl the narrative about IAF a being import pasand. So it's not the IAF but the MOD and it's various arms that are preventing the scale up and deployment.

Wrong, Grippen E with same engine as Tejas Mk2 : GE414 can't defy laws of physics and outperform Tejas Mk2 in radius or other parameters.

AFF

Same Gripen E has flown already.
Mk1A hasn't flown yet, you are talking of mk2 beating Gripen E.

AFF

[Rakesh]

Admiral sir , didn't have badams today ? Didn't expect this mistake from you - confusing float component with surface fleet !! Float means the ability of a vessel to float ie hull, steel etc. Navy has been very succeasful in indigenisation. 100 Pct. the comes move - ie engines , transmissions , electrical etc. About 50 pct here. And then fight - sensors and shooters. Very little success here. But from Karan posts looks like radars are well on tenor way. That's heartening.

I don't eat badams Sir....i read somewhere that it gives you cholesterol

Would it be safe to state that from the Nilgiri (Leander) Class frigate to the Visakhapatnam Class destroyer...the level of indigenisation and confidence in ship buidling has increased?

The navy has been very successful in their indigenisation effort, depsite meagre resources, Babus, MoD, DRDO, etc.

[Akshay Kapoor]

Oh absolutely. GSRE Was a disaster in Godavaris but not anymore.

[rohitvats]

Vivek Saar: You are wasting ur time. Don't bother.

I seriously hope he takes your advise. And some like me can be spared his constant useless rants.

[Rakesh]

Manish: please ignore him. He will self deport. Don't bother responding.

[Manish_Sharma]

The issue is ordering more LCAs. The doctors have identified IAF as the problem. There is not enough data to support this. But that is the diagnosis. .

It is clear from Tatra scam time that politicos, beml type bureaucrats + MoD bureaucrats are playing the game.

Few days back grippen E flew first time but we already had talk of acquiring it by DM and Raha ji.

While Tejas Mk2 is being broadsided.

[nirav]

The issue is ordering more LCAs. The doctors have identified IAF as the problem. There is not enough data to support this. But that is the diagnosis. .

It is clear from Tatra scam time that politicos, beml type bureaucrats + MoD bureaucrats are playing the game.

Few days back grippen E flew first time but we already had talk of acquiring it by DM and Raha ji.

While Tejas Mk2 is being broadsided.

This is misinformation.
20+20 IOC + foc orders were placed in 2006 and 2010 respectively.

IAF was unwilling to order more mk1 In 2015, until the "weapon system" cleared it's certifications and got inducted. They were keen on mk2, but in the 2015 meeting, an alternate route of 83 Mk1A was agreed upon. The proposal was mooted by HAL, not IAF,knowing fully well mk2 will take considerable developmental effort and this allowed the lines to be functional.

50,000 crores have been sanctioned for the effort.

Mk2 has to be designed and developed by ADA, not IAF.
If it's ready by 25-26, mk2 production will takeover@ HAL.

If not Mk1A can be re ordered to not let the line go idle.

Hopefully alongside, Solah or Gripen equip the IAF @ 16/yr.

Ada have their hands full with mk1 and Mk1A, surely they could focus on mk2 only after getting current work done !

Where is the question of broadsiding mk2 ?

[Manish_Sharma]

Manish: please ignore him. He will self deport. Don't bother responding.

Jee bilkul theek!

You are right, last time after making comment about porki balloon , he ran away when asked serious questions.

[Manish_Sharma]

Folks.. sorry to bring bad news again. Apparently, this MII eff-up solah has poisoned the waters terribly. MK2 injins are here, but people don't know what to do with them. Nothing is sanctioned. Nothing is moving. The only good thing that happened is, several scientists got promoted to Sc-H!!

Meanwhile, question to all the Scientist-CH here. ("Scientist - Chair" is the grade at DRDO/ADA equal to the rank of "Chair Marshal" in IAF). What would be the challenges in integrating the IFR probe?

The only good thing I have personally is, some little "science project" that I proposed is getting some traction.

Just reposting to introduce some clarity in discussion.

[ramana]

There are parallels between Arjun and LCA programs: long development, multiple componnets and technologies developed from scratch and changing requirments. Doctrine and combat experience alter the path of development. Personalties and the pressure of war/adversarywar machinery accentuate different views and also effect development.
Technololy dictates the speed of development dictated by doctrine, combat requirments and funding profiles.