LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 31 Oct 2017 19:59

Private companies to carry out 70% of production work for Light Combat Aircraft Tejas

BENGALURU: In a move that will help meet delivery deadlines, defence PSU Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has decided to outsource majority of the production work of Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas. The move will see private firms make nearly 70% of the aircraft.

Presently, HAL is manufacturing LCA Mk1 and is a working on the ramping up of production capacity from eight to 16 aircraft per annum, which it expects to happen by 2019.

"Major sub-assemblies such as front fuselage, centre fuselage, rear fuselage, wings et al, have been outsourced to private industry. The orders have been placed and they need about an year to supply these. Soon, nearly 70% will be made by our industry," a senior official part of the LCA project told TOI.

About 85 vendors (private firms) will be involved in the production of LCA. Some major players are: Dynamatic Technologies Ltd, Bengaluru (front fuselage); VEM Technologies, Hyderabad (centre fuselage); Alpha Tocol, Bengaluru (rear fuselage); L&T, Coimbatore (wings); while the tail fin and rudder will be supplied by National Aerospace Laboratory and Tata Advanced Materials Ltd.

"With increased level of outsourcing and capacity within HAL, we will be able to speed up the deliveries to cater to the present and future requirements of our customers.Enhanced outsourcing is the norm being followed across some important projects at HAL. For example LCH production will involve outsourcing as a major strategy," another senior HAL official said.

HAL has established a second line series production of Tejas, which has come up at Aircraft Division and is being equipped with full-fledged assembly jigs. HAL's plan for expanding Tejas production to 16 fighters per year involves establishing a second assembly line. This has physically replaced the Hawk trainer line.

5 delivered, 6th Tejas soon

The number 45 squadron (Flying Daggers) of the Indian Air Force (IAF) has already taken possession of five LCA Tejas aircraft and will soon have the sixth one. "The sixth one is expected to fly in the next three days and the seventh in about 10 days. By end of March 2018, we hope to deliver 11 planes (including the five delivered)," the official said.

For the first time, the IAF squadron completed the armament detachment—weapons firing—in September and October this year. "That was the proof of the pudding. It was not a developmental test, the squadron that will fly and fight has completed the detachment, and we were glad that it was successful," an IAF source said.

The Flying Daggers Squadron is presently operating from HAL in Bengaluru, but will eventually move to its official base in Sulur, Tamil Nadu.

Tejas, which was first conceived in the early 1980s and officially approved in August 1983, is an indigenous fighter that has undergone several changes before being accepted by the IAF in January 2015. While the first 40 aircraft will be supplied in the present configuration, the IAF has sought more improvements for future ones.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 31 Oct 2017 21:03

Are the sixth and seventh SP5 and SP7?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 31 Oct 2017 21:40

JTull wrote:Private companies to carry out 70% of production work for Light Combat Aircraft Tejas

Jingo khush hua. Eyes fixed on skies over HAL airport for next few days. Hope this will stop the "HAL is lagging in LCA production" rant for atleast few pages..

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 31 Oct 2017 21:49

^^^^ you ought to know that a jingo is never satisfied. Even if 1000 were being made a year we would be saying it is not enough.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 31 Oct 2017 22:58

ArjunPandit wrote:Are the sixth and seventh SP5 and SP7?

Yes. Looking forward to seeing pics and hopefully a video of these 2 birds on their first flights. I've been getting anxious about SP-5 and this news that it will have its first flight this week just made my day!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 31 Oct 2017 23:04

Indranil, any more news on the armament detachment of No.45 squadron? Where was it conducted, what weapons did they employ?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 31 Oct 2017 23:23

HAL line is steadily as clean as TFTA one
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/img ... Master.jpg

Uncluttered assembly
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/img ... Master.jpg

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 Nov 2017 00:35

Aiyoo Karan Saar, be careful. See that piece of wood (on the floor) right next to the second link you posted. Import lobby will call that clutter onlee

And why are those SDREs not wearing uniforms?

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 01 Nov 2017 01:04

LCA and SEF saga reminds me of the story of a man who went looking out for diamonds after selling his farm, while his own farm had diamonds.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 Nov 2017 02:42

srai wrote:
Cybaru wrote:Good! the first step to containing any victim mentality is to ask the victim to offer solutions and not just lay out the problem. Hopefully they will offer solutions within budget.

One thing that needs to be made clear to the IAF is that their solution they come up with needs to be within the capital budget assigned to them over the next five years. It would need to be factored with all of their other purchases (ongoing/planned) during that timeframe. It seems fighter import demands are being made without budgetary constraints in mind.

And guess what is within budget? Tejas

Avtar Singh · Post by **Avtar Singh** » 01 Nov 2017 03:20

It is indeed nice to see such a clean hanger floor. As for no unifrorms, India should never give up on jugaad!
As long as the important parts are done correctly... the fit on fuselage looks good.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 Nov 2017 03:27

^^^ Saar, my post was meant in sarcasm

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Nov 2017 03:41

A lot of the TFTA shopfloors have workers or senior engineers walking around without uniforms. As long as HAL does a good job of assembly and keeps IAF happy, let the workers wear what they want (and be safety conscious).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Nov 2017 03:43

I found fanne's concerns about LCA BVR to be fairly bemusing. They didn't really make a serious point of concern because the EL/M-2032 is proven (and it is what drives the Indian MMR, with an Indian antenna and gimbal) and so is the Derby, which is in IDFAF service & arguably much better than the current R77 on IAF Sukhois, as it actually works given IDFAF is regularly deploying it on their frontline F-16.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 01 Nov 2017 03:47

In fact, we should be satisfied, because as things stand the AESA + new missile combination has a proven plan B option. The IAF Su-30s when inducted for instance did not have one. The IAF now has a choice of two radar types - one in testing from France + Mica (likely on offer) or 2052 (claimed to be ready and on Jag) + Derby. Both Mica and Derby have NG variants in development, though the Derby one is likely nearer. Plus we have Astra headed for user trials (desi R77 eqvt with better electronics). What's really the worry about. If anything there are more options.

Rishi_Tri · Post by **Rishi_Tri** » 01 Nov 2017 04:25

Pratyush wrote:^^^^ you ought to know that a jingo is never satisfied. Even if 1000 were being made a year we would be saying it is not enough.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2017 07:28

Slow morning so let me make a good BRFite post

JTull wrote:The sixth one is expected to fly in the next three days "

One day down and I have heard nothing more. Any news about the sixth? Any Chaiwala info?

srai · Post by **srai** » 01 Nov 2017 11:21

Karan M wrote:A lot of the TFTA shopfloors have workers or senior engineers walking around without uniforms. As long as HAL does a good job of assembly and keeps IAF happy, let the workers wear what they want (and be safety conscious).

One thing to note, it's a staged photo op. It's sort of a standard practice when taking photos/videos like these of assembly floor is to show many workers busy with some work

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 01 Nov 2017 12:02

shiv wrote:Slow morning so let me make a good BRFite post
JTull wrote:The sixth one is expected to fly in the next three days "
One day down and I have heard nothing more. Any news about the sixth? Any Chaiwala info?

Looks like Gyan ji hacked shiv ji account

viveksonkhla · Post by **viveksonkhla** » 01 Nov 2017 15:37

One noob question gentlemen... Does anyone have a clue about the number of Squadron Sorties Completed by LCA as on date?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2017 15:56

viveksonkhla wrote:One noob question gentlemen... Does anyone have a clue about the number of Squadron Sorties Completed by LCA as on date?

This is the type of question that anyone is allowed to ask but any Air Force personnel who shares such information will be booked by Intel folks if they are discovered. I have always been turned down when I have asked "nosey" questions like this. This does not seem to me like "shareable" public information

The number of hours and sorties flown by a squadron is valuable information in terms of what the squadron is doing. Downtime. Hours put in by pilots etc. If the same information is obtained on 2-3 separate occasions - say once from BRF, once from an IAF officer on train, and once from son of IAF officer at airbase - one can build up a picture.

Bottom line. I would not answer if I knew. Others are welcome to do what they think is best.

I would read these posts..
viewtopic.php?p=2225685#p2225685

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 01 Nov 2017 20:41

viveksonkhla wrote:One noob question gentlemen... Does anyone have a clue about the number of Squadron Sorties Completed by LCA as on date?

Was discussed a few pages back. Search if you are willing.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 01 Nov 2017 22:03

viveksonkhla wrote:One noob question gentlemen... Does anyone have a clue about the number of Squadron Sorties Completed by LCA as on date?

That's indeed a noob question. Hakeem is right. People don't give out those operational details. When Tejas reaches a landmark number of flying hours, it will be made public. You, me and everyone else can know then.

In testing, they have flown 70 sorties in 2 months using 4 planes. I really want to meet those people who said Tejas is an unreliable platform.

Kartik,

The detachment that Chetan has talked about basically tested the cleared armaments only. The ranges that they were tested in have better telemetry and measurement accuracy. I am told that Tejas did wonderfully well there. I have been hearing only good news from testing these past few weeks.

negi · Post by **negi** » 01 Nov 2017 22:04

Things are done in India only when survival is in danger; IAF's needs are a necessity that too when relations with the neighbor go sour , Tejas or for that matter any weapons development are NOT, we would have never made the TN device or even the Agni had these items be available for purchase . Our only hope is when world stops selling us weapons which we need because we do not have a 'culture' to make things, it does not come to us naturally or organically simply because we have never felt need for machines ; we have so much manual labour at our disposal that we have never felt the need to build 'machines' remember we even shutdown the famous HMT because we never had the passion for mechanical watches we were in it simply for utility, same thing applies to all walks of life we do not want to get into any line of work that has huge initial capital expenditure that has no short term returns so we should not get surprised with the way our weapons programs fare; look at foundations we do not even make our own CNC Lathe machines (most of them are collaborations ), forging machines for cold forging gun barrels are imported , best shapers and milling machines for propellers are imported , any nation that imports fundamental building tools can never truly get into business of making of complex machines , we will dabble into everything but never be able to make a mark unless that fire comes from within and at grass roots level . Government dependent product development will always fail the best weapons platform built even in WWII era were built with major components from private enterprise (as in from people who were in it due to passion more than the money) , be it the Tiger tank , FW 190, Spitfire or even the P-51 Mustang these were government owned programs but their key components and engines came from private companies like Porsche, BMW, RR and Allison .

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 01 Nov 2017 22:53

Indranil wrote:
viveksonkhla wrote:One noob question gentlemen... Does anyone have a clue about the number of Squadron Sorties Completed by LCA as on date?
That's indeed a noob question. Hakeem is right. People don't give out those operational details. When Tejas reaches a landmark number of flying hours, it will be made public. You, me and everyone else can know then.

In testing, they have flown 70 sorties in 2 months using 4 planes. I really want to meet those people who said Tejas is an unreliable platform.

Kartik,

The detachment that Chetan has talked about basically tested the cleared armaments only. The ranges that they were tested in have better telemetry and measurement accuracy. I am told that Tejas did wonderfully well there. I have been hearing only good news from testing these past few weeks.

Thank you Indranil. Very glad to hear that the Tejas has been doing well after entry into service.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Nov 2017 05:21

For folks who believe that you can have AMCA without Mk2

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/925660449487560705 --> Mk2 has to be pursued both as product improvement as well as an industrial germinator for 5th gen technologies.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 02 Nov 2017 09:18

Rakesh wrote:For folks who believe that you can have AMCA without Mk2

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/925660449487560705 --> Mk2 has to be pursued both as product improvement as well as an industrial germinator for 5th gen technologies.

The product improvement is not just a function of new airframe. It is the most important function of the mission systems and electronics package.

So even if the airframe is not persued it's ok as long as the systems development is complete.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 Nov 2017 11:55

Rakesh wrote:For folks who believe that you can have AMCA without Mk2

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/925660449487560705 --> Mk2 has to be pursued both as product improvement as well as an industrial germinator for 5th gen technologies.

Surely, India can do multiple projects simultaneously

Why is the GoI in the habit of starving R&D (funding and staffing) but expect to produce "world-class" stuff? All of these are long-duration projects and need continuous resources for two decades (or longer). Momentum needs to be built upon, iterative enhancement/learning needs to be incorporated and multiple avenue needs to be pursued.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 02 Nov 2017 12:10

srai wrote:Surely, India can do multiple projects simultaneously Why is the GoI in the habit of starving R&D (funding and staffing) but expect to produce "world-class" stuff?

Many reasons, farmer loan waiver across many states, economic growth stimulus to ensure economy is doing great by 2019 elections. Sadly, Tejas is not a vote bank.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 02 Nov 2017 12:17

Rakesh wrote:
srai wrote:
One thing that needs to be made clear to the IAF is that their solution they come up with needs to be within the capital budget assigned to them over the next five years. It would need to be factored with all of their other purchases (ongoing/planned) during that timeframe. It seems fighter import demands are being made without budgetary constraints in mind.
And guess what is within budget? Tejas

Yes, the perfidy of inflated Russian and Western manufacturers will force IAF to induct more Tejas to stay within available national resources.

S B Deo sadly isnt a person who inspires confidence. When heading WAC, he made useless models of missiles with fictitious range & performance criteria that was displayed at one of the Aero Indias. The models didnt consider available engines, propellant, warhead, aerodynamics. Just sleek looking models that is an insult to the field of engineering.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 02 Nov 2017 12:39

Rakesh wrote:
srai wrote:
One thing that needs to be made clear to the IAF is that their solution they come up with needs to be within the capital budget assigned to them over the next five years. It would need to be factored with all of their other purchases (ongoing/planned) during that timeframe. It seems fighter import demands are being made without budgetary constraints in mind.
And guess what is within budget? Tejas

This doesn't seem to matter much. Not even timeline. I have stopped taking "IAF needs numbers and fast" argument seriously. Clearly even IAF doesn't seem to be thinking from that point as priority. Multiple sources indicate, even MK1A is on hold. MK2 is in cold storage. AMCA is yet to receive approval. While IAF is going gaga over Gripen and has no plan B. I mean what kind of AF has no plan B..? I am sorry to say this but is IAF gonna say the same in the event of war..? That they don't have plan B..? Plan A is generally optimistic, ambitions and often goes for a toss. I wonder how this simple logic is lost on as professional an AF as IAF. Particularly given the history of procurement. Why decades, even MMRCA saga must have taught IAF that even buying off-the-shelf take decades. Now who is accountable for not having plan B..? MoD is decision maker and the responsibility of decisions/delays rest with them. But they are dependent on IAF for technical inputs. How can IAF give only one option and expect MoD to execute it..? In all fairness while IAF is thinking from its own perspective GOI had to take into account many more things - money, geopolitics, industrial capabilities. Even if we assume a highly efficient and honest MoD is in existence, its not possible to make work one option every time. There should be always a plan B for such complex issues. 126 Rafale or EF were never gonna happen given cost. IAF kept saying no 'plan B'. But then Plan B emerged - Rafale + SE. Since IAF didn't bother to come up its own plan B, GOI forced one on them. If this doesn't work GOI will have to force plan C. This is not a very good situation. We should have had our plan B itself as Rafale + LCA. It was very practical and doable. This whole SE business will cost us another decade now and perhaps we will end up with LCA only but with 10yr delay. And subsequent delay on AMCA. The whole thinking and working is so fcuked up.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Nov 2017 12:44

IAF is going gaga over Gripen?

Anyways, you are welcome to your views.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 02 Nov 2017 14:15

deejay wrote:IAF is going gaga over Gripen?

Anyways, you are welcome to your views.

Just accumulated frustration coming out as hyperbole. IAF does look smitten by Gripen. I wanted to point out to the IAF's preference to Gripen when LCA MK2 would be more or less be as much capable and would have come in same time frame had we not sat on our hands for too long.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Nov 2017 14:22

JayS wrote:
deejay wrote:IAF is going gaga over Gripen?

Anyways, you are welcome to your views.
Just accumulated frustration coming out as hyperbole. IAF does look smitten by Gripen. I wanted to point out to the IAF's preference to Gripen when LCA MK2 would be more or less be as much capable and would have come in same time frame had we not sat on our hands for too long.

What are HAL's views on Mk 2? How willing is HAL to take on the MK 2?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 02 Nov 2017 14:34

deejay wrote:
JayS wrote:
Just accumulated frustration coming out as hyperbole. IAF does look smitten by Gripen. I wanted to point out to the IAF's preference to Gripen when LCA MK2 would be more or less be as much capable and would have come in same time frame had we not sat on our hands for too long.
What are HAL's views on Mk 2? How willing is HAL to take on the MK 2?

From what we know from public discourse, HAL was not very keen initially on MK2, since their production line would have went idle for 2-3yrs before MK2 would come up for production. So they pushed for MK1A. Its to be seen if they can deliver on their promises. But what at least I do not know is, had MK1 were ordered in enough numbers so production would continue until MK2 design completion, would HAL be still equally unwilling to go for MK2..?

In addition, GOI had floated idea of 200+ MK2 to be produced by private company with $12B. I have never seen any info on why it never took off. My "guess" is no private player was willing to take the offer. But I am still looking for answers why it never got materialized.

That aside, my frustration with IAF is with this "no plan B" thing. We have been hearing it since so long. First with Rafale and now with SE fighter. IMO, this will eventually lead IAF to tight spots always where they have to swallow forced decisions. Not a good situation for IAF itself from morale and planning perspective. A good planner would consider highly likely inordinate delays in procurement in our system.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 02 Nov 2017 14:44

I doubt you would get that answer out in the open JayS.

kit · Post by **kit** » 02 Nov 2017 14:56

deejay wrote:
JayS wrote:
Just accumulated frustration coming out as hyperbole. IAF does look smitten by Gripen. I wanted to point out to the IAF's preference to Gripen when LCA MK2 would be more or less be as much capable and would have come in same time frame had we not sat on our hands for too long.
What are HAL's views on Mk 2? How willing is HAL to take on the MK 2?

I guess nowhere else in the world is the import lobby so strong !! .. one would rather keep doing their thing and get the projects going than trumpeting from the rooftops .. guess its easier that way, i would expect little news from tejas mark 2 and maybe some snippets for MCA for next 2 years

kit · Post by **kit** » 02 Nov 2017 15:02

deejay wrote:IAF is going gaga over Gripen?

Anyways, you are welcome to your views.

Yawn .. F18 goes to Navy and Gripen to IAF makes "everyone ELSE" happy and seems so if import lobbies work hard. That decision will wait till 2019.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 02 Nov 2017 15:07

That IAF is behind the SE deal is a misnomer. The MMRCA reqmt curtailed with 36 Rafale order, now being hawked as SE, MII, SP thing is today firmly a GOI initiative. IAF is part of GOI and has laid out the QRs for what the SE should be. IAF is not responsible for anything else in this new initiative. It will ofcourse be part of the tech evaluation process. But only for the aircraft. Manufacturing and partnership are equally important part of this deal and IAF is no way capable to judge that and it won't.

In some ways, this deal is to address the lack of pvt industry players, as the expertise does not exist, in the private industry to take on fighter production without hand holding. It appears to me that since no pvt player came forward to build a large no. of (200) LCA, the need to create the expertise in pvt sector is being addressed through the SE deal.

However, I am yet to understand why there is no joint bid by HAL + a Pvt Indian manufacturer for the MII, SE deal using the Mk 2 platform?

The deal as of now appears to be blatantly played in the media. I get a sense that the Americans are strong favourites with the Govt. They also dominate the media space. So much so that any counter view is getting clubbed with liking the opponents product. The Americans are also gunning for other deals as obvious in PAK FA thread. The F 35 push has now started speculating with authority on a confidential IAF report making it sound that IAF has rejected the PAK FA.

Just a prediction - In 02 / 03 years I won't be surprised if hear the Americans hawking the Osprey or the new Valor.

Any American TOT will come with the penalty of many 04/05/06 letter binding slavery like COMCASA, KISNEPHANSA, etc. I would rather not source such weapons.

BTW, election year (2019) no decisions will be taken pre results.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 02 Nov 2017 15:11

Zynda wrote:I doubt you would get that answer out in the open JayS.

Majority of things discussed here are all "shooting in dark" only. We have only miniscule info through some news items, technical articles and some off the record interactions with persons related to these projects. Discussions are more to satisfy our own jingo minds than to be of any real consequence. I doubt anyone here will be so much critical if s/he is shown all the files and made aware of all intricacies. Its said that those who know the least argue the most.