LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

[Kartik]

Many question arise in my mind. Is IAF comparing MK1 with Gripen NG/F16..? Looks like it is. Have they made it clear in their statement...? Does the committee understand that within the same time frame that Gripen or F16 comes, perhaps with a difference of a couple of years MK2 can also come in IAF..? In what areas MiG21 is better than LCA...?? Highly disappointed with IAF's response.

I mean think about it F-16 maintenance is 3 hours per flight hour, Gripen's 6!!! Who writes such stuff? If IAF did this in an official reply, it will be a shame!

They seem to be quoting LCA's endurance on internal fuel only. That too realistic numbers with reserves etc. If LCA could only fly 59 minutes, then all its ferry flights from Bangalore to Jodhpur/Gwalior would have to supersonic from Take off to landing. In reality, with 2 * 1200 ltr + 725 ltrs, it can fly from Bangalore to Jaisalmer.

On the other hand, Gripen and F-16's endurance has been quoted at ferry loadouts. Under those loadouts, those aircrafts can't carry any payloads.

At AI'17, the trainer prototypes (forget SPs) were giving more than 2 guest flights, each of close to 1 hour each per day. There are 24 hours in a day.

The only area where the Mig-21 beats the Tejas is top speed.

I will say this openly, if IAF did indeed give these numbers, it is a shame. If it did not, it should come out and defend its name.

it's a hit job IR. Simple as that. Stuff that is easily available online, put together by someone who doesn't really have access to the performance data of the Tejas in service. BS like endurance of 59 minutes versus refueled endurance of Gripen E (not yet demonstrated) and F-16. Plus BS about maintenance man-hours for the Tejas Mk1 (this 20 hours of maintenance per flight hour was a figure I vaguely remember from a couple of years ago, when the Tejas Mk1 hadn't entered service).

[suryag]

and in iron fist didnt they actually have a turnaround time that permitted them to fly 2 sorties in a day

[ramana]

KArtik, The hit job is beyond that reporter's level. He got some briefing material which was sadly incorrect and worse false.

[Kartik]

This was an old article on ET, about the issues that were then reported for the Tejas Mk1, before it entered service

link

NEW DELHI: From performance shortfalls to maintenance issues, the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas Mk-I has shortcomings that will be addressed in the LCA Mk-II version, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said on Friday.

In a written reply in the Lok Sabha, Parrikar said that the government has sanctioned project for development of LCA Mk-II in 2009. "Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) is the prime agency for development of LCA Mk-II with public and private partnership ..

ccording to Parrikar, the following shortcomings have been reported in LCA Tejas Mk-I:

> Absence of Internal Jammer affecting survivability.

> Aircraft performance shortfalls.

> Maintainability issues.

n a release, the Ministry of Defence said that the shortcomings were primarily due to following reasons:

> Internal jammer technology at that time was based on TWT amplifier which needed about 1000 ltr volume space for integration on aircraft. Hence it could not be accommodated at the time of development of LCA Tejas, Mk-I.

The maintainability issues were raised by Indian Air Force (IAF) late in 2009, when design and drawings were already frozen for Mk-I. However, many of the safety critical maintenance issues are already addressed in Mk-I.

All the above mentioned shortcomings in LCA Mk-I have been addressed in LCA Mk-II version, the release added.

According to an ET report earlier this month, the government is seriously considering whether to hand over the project to build a new, improved version of the Tejas indigenous fighter plane to the private sector for timebound and efficient execution.

Sources told ET that discussions have taken place in the top echelons of the government on the best ways to inject urgency into the Tejas programme, possibly even with the involvement of a private sector player that would be clearly incentivised to deliver a new aircraft on time and within budget.

Should such a move fructify, it would mean a radical departure in the long-prevalent approach that only state-run firms could undertake strategic programmes of this nature.

Most of these maintenance issues were to be addressed in the Mk1A variant. So the 20 maintenance hours vs 1 flight hour figure is BS, utter BS. The No.45 squadron has already flown over 400 hours with just 4 Tejas Mk1 fighters earlier this year itself, at a rate of ~100 hours per year for each fighter in service. That didn't indicate any issue with serviceability, which is a big deal for a fighter just entering service. Squadron pilots rave about the fighter, its engine's reliability - so we know that this report is a pile of cow dung.

[ArjunPandit]

lets not say cowdung, that has some utility, ...lets be secular and say it pork

[nam]

The IAF said the Tejas is far behind its competitors like the JAS 39 Gripen manufactured by the Swedish aerospace company Saab and the US made F-16 manufactured by Lockheed Martin, sources said.

So the IAF asks for a Mig-21 sized jet and then complain it is not big enough?

How about the country asks the IAF to take it or leave it? We as a nation are ready to face defeat fighting in a home made jet.

With a 12 trillion economy, if the Chinese can defend their nation with no access to western tech and copied russian tech, I am sure we can manage too.

Personally i was supportive to get another type of SE jet, because of Production limits of LCA and timelines.

However if IAF indeed published these numbers to GoI and wants F-16/Gripen by bad mouthing 3 decades of hard work, we will find men who will fight in Indian made jet.

[srai]

Chill guys, that's DDM hit job . Some amature wrote that stuff , simply hilarious.

Millions in India are reading it on ToI and being influenced by it. Babus too. Nothing of a laughing matter.

[sum]

Have no doubt that it is somewhat in line with current IAF thought process and is not DDM

I remember that when news of a SE fighter first hit DDM, BRF was unanimous that it was a hitjob but it turned out it wasnt

There seems a serious battle underway and hope Tejas triumphs at the end

[PratikDas]

Have no doubt that it is somewhat in line with current IAF thought process and is not DDM

I remember that when news of a SE fighter first hit DDM, BRF was unanimous that it was a hitjob but it turned out it wasnt

There seems a serious battle underway and hope Tejas triumphs at the end

Saurav Jha has had a “do or die” tone in his recent tweets about the Tejas in the context of the call for the SE fighter. I’d agree with sum ji that the matter is serious. I have faith in our DM though. That is one strong mahila. I hope she will make the right call.

[Indranil]

This is not DDM alone. And that is sad.

[Vivek K]

NaMo needs to fire all IAF brass and find younger leaders that will fight with Indian weapons.

[shaun]

Chill guys, that's DDM hit job . Some amature wrote that stuff , simply hilarious.

Millions in India are reading it on ToI and being influenced by it. Babus too. Nothing of a laughing matter.

Well , millions don't have voting rights to select . ToI article will influence the actual stake holders . Simply NO. Unless one can substantiate , I won't drag IAF with that farticle. Second line of fighters have more to do with Make in India policy and speeding up the present needs where both GOI and IAF is in nod with each other. More over 16 and as iteration, 18 will beat gripen .

[sum]

Shaun ji, what you say was valid couple of years back but nowadays GoI is saying no money for 2nd line and Rafale was the goodie to keep you quiet and make do with more LCA orders (which is ultimate MII) which IAF isnt agreeing to (and it really isnt a secret)

[Cybaru]

NaMo needs to fire all IAF brass and find younger leaders that will fight with Indian weapons.

+100
We need to start pushing make in India articles and influencing far and wide in local newspapers. Not the BRF magazine, but in local papers. They can reside there as well, but they need to be written and published for local readers. Operation demystification. Ramana you have mail at Y.

[Sid]

I think to counter such asinine arguments, only thing is to offer change in overall doctrine.

If the argument is that LCA is less capable, then acquire them in numbers to mitigate its tech drawbacks. Soviets and Chinese built their AF on that logic for a long time, counter high tech with numbers, and win the war of attrition. If enemy already knows you have only 200 Su-30, and you will have to piss blood to replace any losses during war, then it’s easy to strategize and procure counter platforms. But if they think that any losses of LCA will be replaced at breakneck speed, then they will find it hard to where they spend their money.

That thought process itself will instill fear of god in your enemies. Current thinking only proves that we don’t believe in ourself.

LCA, Arjun, INSAS, etc they all are headed towards same fate. We need a legal process to stop this nonsense. Introduce a bloody law, to stop any import other then of strategic value.

[rajpa]

Clearly a coordinated hit job. This also appears in the following website...

https://www.dailyo.in/politics/tejas-ma ... 20512.html

Ignore. Psyops.

[Vivek K]

The IAF brass is showing a callous disregard for pilots’s lives. The disruption of the MiG-21 supply chain with the collapse of the Soviet Union led to the loss of several young and budding pilots in whom billions had been invested.

The LCA has not had a single crash in more than 15 years of flying! I challenge the IAF to bring an aircraft to rival that record.

This coming from a force whose previous chief has been Indicted for corruption in procurement is startling. It shows that Indian Forces are drunk with power and arrogant in attitude. This also shows why local weapon systems do not succeed in India.

This corrupt practices has
1. Made India low tech - begging the world for weapons and denying high tech jobs and industry to Indians.
2. Robbed future generations of a healthy economy by mortgaging it for their pleasures and whims.
3. Robbed India of an independent foreign policy because India needs her suppliers’ support for every action.
4. Lying to the country and hiding failures of imports - MKIs in Hangars, 29ks with less than 20% serviceability, and keeping derelict foreign purchases for cannibalizing spares.

Shame!

[JayS]

Another article written by same "reporter". Long one, taking look at historical things with LCA and Marut etc. Mostly junk and devoid of any proper analysis. I wont link it because its not worth it.

[JayS]

As to the IAF, my guess is that the current generation is tired of beta testing and they just don't want another MiG29/MKI 'debugging' saga. The way it works now is that the IAF comes up with a set of requirements for a fighter and then MoD/PMO tell them what they can have based on money available, strategic imperatives (feed the Russians/French) and PSU union pressures..

I wonder how much more tired USAF or Soviet AF or Chinese AF must be. They developed so many of systems with their sweat n blood in the development. Compared to that IAF is a spoilt brat with far more spoon feeding.

I hope your guess is wrong and IAF has not washed off its hand from being a "Builders AF"..

[shaun]

Why the IAF bashing based on some reports?? If people here can argue about teja's merit and demerits of foreign maal , don't you guys think the various stake holders who are actually involved can make similar arguments ?? MOD is the ultimate decision maker. May be we can device some mechanism to counter farticles coming out from our DDM . Corruption is deep rooted in our society and when govt of the day is corrupt you will see Corruption in force as posted above . It is reflection of our society which even the defenders (mostly in the procurement process ) can't escape.

[Aditya_V]

Have no doubt that it is somewhat in line with current IAF thought process and is not DDM

I remember that when news of a SE fighter first hit DDM, BRF was unanimous that it was a hitjob but it turned out it wasnt

There seems a serious battle underway and hope Tejas triumphs at the end

You have to understand some of these decisions are made by MOD staff and Brass who are about to retire, if many of their children are abroad, they are not invested in India and hence make decisions likewise and this has been the process for the last 30 years.

It is this group which outers everything takes pride in false claims like 35% of NASA are Indians etc, the next gen Nadella's etc. They see this as proud achievement and not on setting up a base for India's future.

The question is are young pilots, technicians who will have answer for decisions taken today and have to answer 10 years down. do they have any say or many near retirement MOD Babus calling the shots.

[manjgu]

i dont seriously believe IAF is the spoilt child here... the fact of the matter is the babus and political elite has developed a vested interest in phoren maal. HAL se kya milega ?? if everything is done inside INdia what will the babus and DM do?? we have civilain oversight over defence forces.. so the responsibility is theirs to provide direction/policy.

[Austin]

I mean think about it F-16 maintenance is 3 hours per flight hour, Gripen's 6!!! Who writes such stuff? If IAF did this in an official reply, it will be a shame!

Probably the other way round Gripen must be 3 and F-16 6 hrs , From SAAB website the stats are http://saab.com/region/india/gripen/gri ... cost-edge/

Gripen is substantially lower in its Life Cycle Cost (LCC) than other fighters, including singe engine fighters. A study by IHS Jane estimates the flight hour cost of Gripen at $4,700 per hour (2012 USD), with its closest competitor being the Block 40/50 F-16s at an estimated $7,000 per hour.

[ramana]

Cybaru I didn't get any mail!!!

[thammu]

Another One!! The import lobby is firing on all cylinders!!

Tejas is not fit for skies: Is Modi's Make In India coming in the way of armed forces?https://www.dailyo.in/politics/tejas-ma ... 20512.html

The indigenously made single-engine fighter Tejas, now 30 years in the making, isn't yet good enough to protect the Indian skies on its own. This is what the Indian Air Force (IAF) has gently but firmly told the Narendra Modi-led NDA government.

The government recently told the IAF to scrap its plans of acquiring single-engine fighters through the "Make In India" route and instead go for the totally homemade Tejas.

There are only two proven single-engine fighters. They are the JAS 39 Gripen, a single-engine multi-role fighter manufactured by the Swedish aerospace company Saab, and the US-made F-16, manufactured by Lockheed Martin. While the USA has been applying diplomatic pressure on India to go for the F-16s, former defence minister Manohar Parrikar's Sweden visit in 2016 indicated that India was also considering the Gripen.

The Modi government is keen to reduce India's dependence on foreign defence platforms and wants to create a defence manufacturing hub in India. Parrikar, during his short but eventful tenure, ensured that the IAF agreed to induct the homemade fighter, and to be fair, Tejas has received the support of the forces, especially the IAF, which has agreed to buy 123 Tejas fighters, though not fighting fit yet.

India's quest for a home-grown fighter

What the Modi government is doing now has been tried earlier too. Tejas isn't India's first homemade fighter.

Charged by the Nehruvian vision of industrial and economic self-reliance, the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) - a defence public sector unit (PSU) that now produces the Tejas - had produced the twin engine HF-24 Marut, India's first indigenous fighter-bomber in the 1960s. Work for the Marut began in mid-1950s. Kurt Tank, who had designed the Fockë-Wulf-190 - one of the top performing German fighters during World War II - was persuaded by Jawaharlal Nehru to take over the responsibility of making the Marut.

tejas690_111017020022.jpg

The first fighter was handed over to IAF's Dagger Squadron on April 1, 1967. The Marut proved its mettle in the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Two squadrons of the Marut would fly more than 300 combat sorties during the fortnight-long hostilities between India and Pakistan. Not a single Marut was shot down or damaged by the enemy. By the mid-1970s, the fighter had reached 70 per cent indigenisation. A total of 147 Marut fighters were built before they were decommissioned in the 1980s.

However, the Marut was under-powered and proved too expensive to maintain. And like the Marut, the Tejas too has technical limitations.

The homemade dream and the problems therein

According to those who have given the best years of their life to the IAF, the Tejas is small, nimble, and unique, but it has its share of problems as well.

The Tejas requires more man-hours to maintain, cannot carry as much ordnance as its counterparts and most importantly, cannot fly as far as the others in a single sortie. Other single-engine fighters can be effective over a radius of over 500km whereas the Tejas can do just 300km. The radius of action of the Tejas is far smaller, making it less effective.

Balancing the short-, medium- and long-term needs of India

The IAF's firm rejection is based on the short- and medium-term need to build capabilities to deal with threats from either Pakistan or China or both. The number of fighter aircraft IAF has is dwindling steadily. It will lose another 11 fighter squadrons by 2019-20, bringing the total strength down to 22 fighter squadrons.

Lack of spares and poor serviceability of fighter aircraft means a further drop in number of fighters for operational task on a given day.

In contrast, Pakistan has between 24 and 27 squadrons and is now inducting the Chinese-made J-17 fighters. The Chinese People's Liberation Army (Air Force) has about 3,000 fighters. However, the entire fleet of fighters of neither Pakistan nor China are new or up-to-the-mark. But numbers do matter if these outdated, old and new fighters of Pakistan and China can be deployed in a concentrated manner in a given theatre. Clearly, the IAF's refusal to go only for homemade fighter aircraft is driven by its anxiety "to do the job".

The government's decision to go for the homemade fighters is driven by a slightly different perspective. It aims to make India a manufacturing hub - including defence - in the long term. Giving up on the homemade Marut in the 1980s wasn't the best decision. But, hindsight always gives wisdom. A developing country with competing needs would definitely invest more on food, health and education than funding weapons programmes. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the former head of Pakistan, who was later hanged, once famously remarked "we will eat grass" but will build a nuclear bomb. Pakistan did build the bomb but, in the process, became a textbook example of a failed state.

We, as a nation, decided to invest more on IITs and medical colleges, roads, dams, agriculture, and airports and thereby building a composite and progressive India. There have been slips and the job could have been done better, but over the years, the Indian economy has emerged strong and resilient.

So, who is wrong and what is the way forward?

In the day and age of instant food, Any Time Money, and quick gratification, problems or difficult questions necessarily require binary answers - right or wrong. Unfortunately, in this case there is neither a right nor a wrong answer.

Both the IAF and government are right and wrong. The IAF, because of the nature of job at hand, is looking at the immediate scenario and wants to be prepared. Similarly, by insisting on the homemade fighter, the government too wants to be prepared for the long-term.

Perhaps what Nehru did in the 1950s is the way forward. Just as Nehru hired Kurt Tank for the Marut, India can hire another expert to fine-tune the Tejas. India today can well afford to do that. And, in the interim, India can also well afford to buy few more fighter aircraft through the "Make In India" route to fill the gaps.

Let's not give up on the Tejas but let us also give our air warriors what they want so that they can do their job.

[Austin]

The MOD can still overrule IAF objection on Tejas if these reports are true , IAF/HAL/DRDO points of view are not any binding obligation on the MOD but inputs from the , MOD is the final arbitrator and decision maker and hope she overrules the need for SE competition and instead funds and buys more Tejas ......Some one up there needs balls of steel to do that or may be arm of steel in present case.

[kvraghav]

^^
I do not think it has anything to do with the MOD simply because if it related to kickbacks, the MOD will get its cut event if it is PSU. This is due to the vendors involved in the PSU manufacturing.

[Austin]

^^
I do not think it has anything to do with the MOD simply because if it related to kickbacks, the MOD will get its cut event if it is PSU. This is due to the vendors involved in the PSU manufacturing.

I was just pointing out that MOD is not obliged to accept the report from IAF or HAL etc , MOD can overrule it and come to its own conclusion and can tell IAF to buy Tejas and cancel SE.

But if the idea is for kickbacks and every one is involved like the Augusta AW101 deal then there is nothing much any one can do even Opp Parties will get their cut and other stake holders.

[RKumar]

Personally, SE fighter procurement was turn off moment for me. Although I was against Rafale procurement but i do understand it's importance.

I am glad GoI and MoD have similar views like most of us. I do really hope, GoI is not fooled by biased and import friendly some decision making brass with their trust in fake broucher data and/or personal interests (foreign trips, kids PRs or monetary benefits).

The above report, show IAF as institute in bad light. I doubt if IAF leaked it.

[Austin]

Just having similar views by MOD/GOI wont matter really , They need to enforce on the fact that SE has no place in IAF inventory and they need to buy Tejas which they can , Else for all we know MOD/GOI/HAL/IAF are playing Good Cop Bad Cop and all want their own share of flesh.

[NRao]

The MOD can still overrule IAF objection on Tejas if these reports are true , IAF/HAL/DRDO points of view are not any binding obligation on the MOD but inputs from the , MOD is the final arbitrator and decision maker and hope she overrules the need for SE competition and instead funds and buys more Tejas ......Some one up there needs balls of steel to do that or may be arm of steel in present case.

Based on a few news reports, unintended I may add, seems to me the PMO took charge of some components - such as the AMCA - thus becoming an unintentional arbitrator of this whole situation. ???????

Also, I doubt if NS has the same authority that MP had. In other words I doubt we would be facing this very situation with MP around.

[nam]

Gripen is substantially lower in its Life Cycle Cost (LCC) than other fighters, including singe engine fighters. A study by IHS Jane estimates the flight hour cost of Gripen at $4,700 per hour (2012 USD), with its closest competitor being the Block 40/50 F-16s at an estimated $7,000 per hour.

Not sure it will be the case. F16 have been produced in thousands with tremendous time on combat.

What are gripen numbers?

How can a jet produced in few hundred have lower cost than one produced in thousands?

[chola]

The article cites Doval. If fake, he would come out and say so.

There are too many details in the article to be fully deliberately fake, IMHO. If it had left out names then maybe but certainly not one that mentions our NSA with his background and bearing! Would be a dangerous game to play by any news organization.

Modi’s Make in India is for real. The IAF has better get in line.

Overall, good news.

[manjgu]

nam : maybe due to new tech which has low faliure rates then legacy fighter ( F 16)??

[fanne]

At Ironfist if I recall it was 6 flights by 2, so 3 a day

[shiv]

The MOD can still overrule IAF objection on Tejas if these reports are true , IAF/HAL/DRDO points of view are not any binding obligation on the MOD but inputs from the , MOD is the final arbitrator and decision maker and hope she overrules the need for SE competition and instead funds and buys more Tejas ......Some one up there needs balls of steel to do that or may be arm of steel in present case.

My personal view is that the only way IAF can come anywhere near required squadron strength is to continue with Tejas AND add numbers via import/screwdriver. One or the other will not cut it. Even if we accept F-16 or Gripen tomorrow and bribe all babus and politicians to the tune of a few 1000 crores, India simply does not have the industrial infrastructure even for screwdriver which will take time to build up.

In theory - if we pay the US up front they can deliver us 100 F-16 airframes in 2-3 years. That aside - the engine manufacturer may not be able to ramp up because of order backlog and we will have to take engines from boneyard. But paying them is not going to happen given current laws and domestic politics. The US can equip us with say 100 F-16 by 2025 - but then we will be 120 MiGs down.

[Rakesh]

Okay, now that 24+ hours has passed since the first article was posted by thammu (first post on Page 28 of this thread) and the intial frustration (and rightfully so) has passed...let us now dissect this. Inital reaction from all, including me, was that this was a lifafa article. But tsarkarji kindly confirmed that the account is true. Do remember, these are the suggestions that the IAF came back with after Nirmala Sitharaman - a few weeks back - asked the IAF what are they doing to address the squadron shortage NOW.

We can come to the conclusion that the IAF has shot itself in the foot by making the following statement (I am copying word-for-word from the India Today article);

- Documents accessed by India Today reveal that the IAF has told the government that the "endurance" of Tejas in combat is just about 59 minutes as against 3 hours of Gripen and nearly 4 fours for the F-16.

Q. So then the GoI should ask the IAF why are they inducting a point defence fighter, with 59 minutes of endurance when the Gripen and the F-16 have a longer range? 123 Tejas in 40 Mk1 and 83 MK1A variants are then a colossal waste of money based on the IAF's endurance statement. Which air force inducts a fighter with only 59 minutes of flight time? Like I said earlier, stop production of Tejas at 40 Mk1 variants and induct SE.

-------------------------------------------------

IAF Defends Single Engine Jet Contest, Strafes LCA Tejas: Report
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/11 ... eport.html



There wasn’t a whiff of this one coming. And when India Today broke the story this week, it created more than just a flutter.

The newsbreak, televised Friday (video above) on India Today’s 5pm news show anchored by Livefist’s Shiv Aroor, tells of how the Indian Air Force has pronounced the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft Tejas a sub-optimal combat platform to ‘protect Indian skies’. The story by senior journalist Sudhi Ranjan Sen suggests the IAF’s words were in the form of a presentation to the Ministry of Defence to fight off a hitherto unknown government move to rethink a large impending campaign to build imported fighter jets in India and instead simply buy more LCA Tejas fighters.

The Make in India single engine fighter (SEF) is expected to be a face-off between Sweden’s Gripen E and the American F-16 Block 70 for a deal that involves the sale of at least 100 jets to the Indian Air Force off a new production line in India in partnership with the private ‘strategic partner’. Thirty-three years in development, the LCA Tejas entered tentative service with the IAF last year, with a total of 123 airframes on order to populate five squadrons. The India Today report suggests the Indian government is wondering why it needs to build foreign fighters in India if the LCA Tejas meets single engine fighter requirements. It is reportedly in response to these questions that the IAF has explicitly labelled the LCA Tejas an insufficient combat platform.

While the Indian Air Force and MoD haven’t officially reacted to the story, the suggestion that the MoD is even rethinking the SEF program is explosive. A Request for Information (RFI) on the contest was to have been sent out to Lockheed Martin and Saab by the end of September. That deadline, the IAF chief later declared, had then shifted to the end of October. With no RFI out yet, the India Today report has amplified questions over the delay.

The report is a perplexing one, given that the SEF program has been brandished as the spearhead of India’s Make in India thrust in the field of aerospace. Suggestions of a government rethink — or an effort to whittle down the scope of the SEF contest — would fly directly in the face of expansive discussions both prospective competitors — Lockheed Martin and Saab — have very visibly been holding with Indian industry under the aegis of the MoD’s ambitious Strategic Partnership policy.

The conflict, though, is an expected one and the India Today report perhaps reflects the multiple pressure points weighing on the government at this time. Consider the following:

1. One of the first questions to justifiably erupt when the SEF contest was announced was why India needed imported light fighters when the LCA Tejas had turned the corner into squadron service and was on a path of steady improvement. Armed with the LCA’s performance data and timelines, HAL and the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) have understandably brought to bear a great deal of pressure on the government to reconsider the SEF. There are specific interests at play here, of course — the SEF won’t involve HAL as a license production house, so the latter has no skin in the new game. Within the LCA Tejas ecosystem, ironically, the ADA has nursed misgivings that HAL simply hasn’t ‘owned’ the LCA Tejas as it should.

2. The SEF fighter deal may not have begun in earnest yet, but make no mistake about the enormous political capital that’s already been invested in it. The world’s largest defence firm has the explicit backing of the most unsubtle and unpredictable political force in Trump to keep the contest at the very least on track. That along makes the India Today report explosive, given that there have been no indications so far that the Indian government has doubts about whether to push ahead.

3. Obviously, both Lockheed Martin and Saab see space for their aircraft in Indian inventory alongside the LCA Tejas. The IAF’s reported pronouncements on the LCA only support the argument from vendors that one platform doesn’t replace the other. Of course, both Lockheed Martin and Saab explicitly recognise that concluding a deal with India will necessarily have to mean technology channels to the LCA Tejas program and the proposed AMCA fifth generation fighter. The LCA program however believes performance improvements on the Mk.1A and the less and less likely LCA Mk.2 would narrow the gap considerably. The truth is, the IAF is stoutly unconvinced.

4. The SEF is an ambitious program brandished as one to cure several of India’s aerospace ills at once — the lack of large aviation-building capacity in the private sector, the lack of leading edge technologies on par with the best in the world, crucial aerospace skilling to support a new paradigm in quality manufacturing, the first true harnessing of Indian Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the global airframing business, and not least, quality employment with spill-over effects into other areas. It is these deeply ambitious goals that make the SEF program more than just a funnel to supply 100+ fighters to a customer grappling with squadron strength depletion. Critics of the program offer, on the other hand, that the energies and time spent on creating SEF capacity could well be channeled into improving the LCA program and accelerating the AMCA, additionally suggesting that improved LCA jets could populate squadrons faster than license built foreign jets off a greenfield Indian facility. It is into the IAF’s new pronouncements that these impulses have now smashed.

5. It is difficult to ignore the inventory path the IAF is taking. With a pair of Rafale squadrons, over a hundred LCA Tejas jets and the prospective SEF jets inbound, we’re talking of three all new types in operational service. And this isn’t even considering more twin-engine jets the IAF could consider at a later time, in addition to fifth generation fighters. From an inventory perspective, the scenario plays out ominously: the subtraction of one type — all variants of the MiG-21, and the addition of at least three types.

[shiv]

1 hour for LCA, 4 hours endurance for F-16 is bullshit. If the IAF said it the IAF is bullshiiting. If India Today says the IAF said it, are they telling the truth. And - since when does IAF have 1 person speaking for it. And that too unnamed, And to the media. I can't type much now will be back later. I have a double date with Sonam Kapoor and Sunny Leone. You better believe me - you guys believe everything in print anyway..

[fanne]

I have a simple question (data based on Wiki). LCA and Gripen A-D use the same engine, almost the same weight (LCA is 300kg lighter), wing area (measure of lift) - LCA has 25% more wing area than Gripen, We do not know the drag from the plane in either case. They both use the same engine, then how come Gripen has twice to thrice the range of LCA. Is it wing or design so inefficient? The range difference is a lie. If one number is wrong, who knows about the other number.
I am sure if forum member shift through google, they will find many instances where LCA has flown at a stretch for more than 59 minutes.

[ArjunPandit]

I have a simple question (data based on Wiki). LCA and Gripen A-D use the same engine, almost the same weight (LCA is 300kg lighter), wing area (measure of lift) - LCA has 25% more wing area than Gripen, We do not know the drag from the plane in either case. They both use the same engine, then how come Gripen has twice to thrice the range of LCA. Is it wing or design so inefficient? The range difference is a lie. If one number is wrong, who knows about the other number.
I am sure if forum member shift through google, they will find many instances where LCA has flown at a stretch for more than 59 minutes.

Pilots are drinking petrol..