Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Mar 2018 21:23

neshant, Giving LRUs to US companies to build puts the program into sanctions cage? Are you sure you want that? And besides, they are not build to print shops. Please do think it over and then post.
How does your proposal jive with #MII and strategic autonomy?
Why do you think the Kaveri is being pursued so vigorously?
Looks like Arunachalam bug is biting members today.

It's putting the chidiya into the magician's hands and hope for the best!
he will squeeze the neck at his time and convenience.

With SP8 flight tested three lines are qualified in HAL.

Manish Jain · Post by **Manish Jain** » 13 Mar 2018 23:11

SP8 in flight. Picture courtesy Anantha Krishnan.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 13 Mar 2018 23:14

Some confusion over Production Lines ?

Tejas SP-8 flew for the first time today & is from the new line in the old Hawk hangar which at full capacity will produce 8 per year (py). This augments existing production facilities at the Tejas division ( 5 py) & the old Kiran hangar of the Aircraft Division ( 3py).

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/973 ... 36898?s=19

The #Tejas SP8 that flew today is the 2nd fighter from the hangars of #HAL's Aircraft Div, after SP5. The signs are good and the production rate will now pick up. @akananth

https://twitter.com/writetake/status/97 ... 17249?s=19

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Mar 2018 23:37

From Saurav Jha's twitter

And yes, HAL is readying Tejas SP-9 for its first flight as well. They want to get it done before March 31. Let's see if it happens.

Twitter SJha link

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 13 Mar 2018 23:53

Manish Jain wrote:SP8 in flight. Picture courtesy Anantha Krishnan.

Thank you Manish for the picture. I needed the serial number to update page 1 of this thread.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 13 Mar 2018 23:59

I had told you guys how SP8 and SP9 had got bottled up behind SP5, and that once SP5 comes out you will see SP8 and SP9 come out in fast order. There should be no doubt in any body's mind that they are gearing up to produce 12 Tejas in this fiscal year and 16 in the next.

Manish Jain · Post by **Manish Jain** » 14 Mar 2018 01:19

Rakesh wrote:
Manish Jain wrote:SP8 in flight. Picture courtesy Anantha Krishnan.
Thank you Manish for the picture. I needed the serial number to update page 1 of this thread.

Rakesh, the first page says Line x for SP8. Shouldn't it be Line 2?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 14 Mar 2018 03:49

Manish Jain wrote:
Rakesh wrote: Thank you Manish for the picture. I needed the serial number to update page 1 of this thread.
Rakesh, the first page says Line x for SP8. Shouldn't it be Line 2?

I had no clue from which line SP8 came from. So I waited for someone to chime in. I have updated it now. Thanks again!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 14 Mar 2018 03:56

https://twitter.com/reachanshul/status/ ... 6930956295 ---> The lines have started looking sleek. Fit and Finish has improved by quite a bit.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Mar 2018 06:01

Rakesh,

Officially, SP5 is delivered from line 1.

On ground, SP5 was supposed to be delivered from line 2 and SP8 from line 1. When Line 2 got stuck with SP5, they handed over SP5 to line 1 and Line 1 handed over SP8 to line 2.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 14 Mar 2018 06:23

So its not from the new Hawk assembly line (with slated capacity of 8 per annum) as Saurav Jha put it? But rather from the first line (capacity 5 per annum) and then transferred to the Kiran hangar assembly line (capacity 3 per annum). Am I right in understanding this?

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 14 Mar 2018 06:52

OMG
I am lost now

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 14 Mar 2018 07:25

You can see the composite tape weaved in the yellow parts of the structure.. First time I am seeing this.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 14 Mar 2018 07:54

any brfiters investing in HAL ipo :Pafter this pic??

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Mar 2018 08:21

sudeepj wrote:

You can see the composite tape weaved in the yellow parts of the structure.. First time I am seeing this.

Either you have got impossibly awesome eyes or you are referring to the Aluminium metal tape. Which one is it..?

Later added: I was viewing the posts on mobile, never saw the texture you were referring to. So never mind.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Mar 2018 08:46

Kartik wrote:So its not from the new Hawk assembly line (with slated capacity of 8 per annum) as Saurav Jha put it? But rather from the first line (capacity 5 per annum) and then transferred to the Kiran hangar assembly line (capacity 3 per annum). Am I right in understanding this?

No Saurav has got it right. The two lines are as follows:

Line 1: full capacity = 8 aircraft per year: 5 at "LCA division" and 3 "Kiran hangar".
Line 2: full capacity = 8 aircraft per year at "Aircraft division" which is basically the erstwhile Hawk production line.

SP5 was supposed to be the first aircraft from Line 2. It was completely ready but kept failing at the HSTT. So it was assigned to Line 1 to figure out what was going wrong. In the meanwhile, SP8 which was in the equipping phase at Line 1 was moved to Line 2 to finish. That's how Sp5 was officially delivered from Line 1 and SP8 from Line 2.

Writetake/Tarmak's statement that SP8 is the second aircraft from Line 2 is therefore partially correct.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 14 Mar 2018 09:22

IR reminds me of this famous koundamani senthil joke in Tamil

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Mar 2018 09:57

sudeepj wrote:

You can see the composite tape weaved in the yellow parts of the structure.. First time I am seeing this.

That's just an artifact of whatever post processing Tarmak did.

Here's the actual pic. Click for higher resolution.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 14 Mar 2018 10:01

IR ji now that the squadron numbers are building up are they scaling up enough pilots/techies ? My fear is they will end up with a 1:1 pilot to aircraft ratio. Btw no need on IOC for trainer version

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Mar 2018 10:27

No "ji" yaar. No problem with pilots/techies. IAF knows how to man its squadrons. We don't need to worry about that.

Trainer will be certified too. But not a priority now since no trainers have been ordered

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Mar 2018 12:07

^^ you mean new orders for trainers IR..? As of now 4 trainers are on order which are part of first 20 IOC order. I suppose due to excellent simulator that we have for LCA, the need for trainer is greatly reduced for LCA. Add to that the ease of flying Tejas. So A pilot needs perhaps only a handful of Trainer sorties for type conversion.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Mar 2018 12:23

AFAIK, there are no trainers ordered among the first 40. Sq 45 loans ADA trainers for type training. Yes the simulator is very good. ADE is making an even more updated one.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Mar 2018 12:28

Indranil wrote:AFAIK, there are no trainers ordered among the first 40. Sq 45 loans ADA trainers for type training. Yes the simulator is very good. ADE is making an even more updated one.

From CAG report.

MoD concluded (March 2006) a contract with HAL for supply of 20 LCA
built to IOC standard (16 fighter and 4 trainer) along with role equipment and
support equipment consisting of spares and Tools, Testers and Ground
Equipment (TTGE) items, training devices and maintenance simulators, four
reserve engines, engine support package and engine test bed at a total cost of
`2701.70 crore.

Recently in one news report HAL Chairman was lamenting that SOP for the 4 trainers is not frozen yet. We had a small discussion of this issue on this thread.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Mar 2018 12:29

now I can see the honeycomb structures as well from Indranil's clearer pic!

just kidding... btw, anyone buying HAL IPO? please do like a honest bhakt

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Mar 2018 12:30

SaiK wrote:now I can see the honeycomb structures as well from Indranil's clearer pic!
just kidding... btw, anyone buying HAL IPO? please do like a honest bhakt

Please discuss this IPO thing on economy thread or PSU thread.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Mar 2018 19:27

Cross posting from MK2 thread.

Aditya_V wrote:
Manish Jain wrote:DRDO asks for LCA MK2 funding.

https://www.stratpost.com/drdo-asks-for ... 2-funding/
From the Link

he LCA Mk1A includes four specific capability improvements prescribed by the IAF. These include:

Digital RWR and External SPJ Pod
Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar
Combined Interrogator and Transponder (CIT)
ASRAM – Close Combat Missile
Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Missile
Does this mean it has been decided to Integrate ASRAAM for Tejas MK1A and drop Python 5?

This mentioned in Parliamentary committee report and thus is quite authentic info. So ASRAM it is I suppose.
http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Defe ... nce_43.pdf

IAF has proposed a few improvements like Digital RWR and External SPJ Pod,
Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar, Combined Interrogator and
Transponder (CIT), ASRAM – Close Combat Missile and Beyond Visual Range
(BVR) Missile and like a few Maintainability Improvements . All these are being
addressed in the next version of LCA i.e. LCA Mk-1A. MoD has approved the
procurement of 83 LCA Mk-1A.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 14 Mar 2018 20:18

Dilip sir did allude to this in Santhanam style

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 14 Mar 2018 22:58

AIM-132 ASRAAM for Tejas ? AIM-132 has a longer range than Python 5 so this should add BVR lethality to Tejas. But it is more sanction prone. Python 5 is also said to be more maneuverable than ASRAAM.

sohamn · Post by **sohamn** » 14 Mar 2018 23:38

I think ASRAAM derives initial guidance from Radar inputs because I don't think the IR seeker in the missile can lock at ranges in excess of 15-20 km, and ASRAAM has a range of 50km.

So, the question is that Does Tejas, without inbuilt FLIR, can provide guidance to ASRAAM at long ranges thereby exploiting its full capability and thus not giving away its position?

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 14 Mar 2018 23:45

Indranil wrote:
sudeepj wrote:
You can see the composite tape weaved in the yellow parts of the structure.. First time I am seeing this.
That's just an artifact of whatever post processing Tarmak did.

Here's the actual pic. Click for higher resolution.
https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/28701029_1692418574185917_2445434868507427669_o.jpg?oh=3b5ba285912815341f6519f4118bafad&oe=5B3BE673

Not visible in the higher resolution at all! though I have never seen that kind of an artifact in all the image editing I have done.. So I am not sure how Tarmak managed to get that kind of texture in. Its a possibility that the post processing makes the texture more visible.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 14 Mar 2018 23:46

IAF commits to 324 Tejas fighters, provided a good Mark-II jet is delivered

After years of being critical of the Tejas fighter, which is still not combat-ready 35 years after the light combat aircraft project was first approved by the government, the IAF has now agreed to induct 324 of the indigenous jets in the long-term to make up for its fast-depleting number of fighter squadrons.
IAF has “firmly committed” to 123 Tejas jets at present, which will come at a cost of over Rs 75,000 crore ...

-Ankit

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 14 Mar 2018 23:52

Ankit Desai wrote:IAF commits to 324 Tejas fighters, provided a good Mark-II jet is delivered

After years of being critical of the Tejas fighter, which is still not combat-ready 35 years after the light combat aircraft project was first approved by the government, the IAF has now agreed to induct 324 of the indigenous jets in the long-term to make up for its fast-depleting number of fighter squadrons.
IAF has “firmly committed” to 123 Tejas jets at present, which will come at a cost of over Rs 75,000 crore ...
-Ankit

75,000 crores / 123 = 609 crores per plane, which amounts to 90-100 million dollars per plane. This appears to be wrong as the unit cost of the Mk1 and MK1A plane used to be around 20-30 million dollars per unit.

nam · Post by **nam** » 14 Mar 2018 23:52

LCA is not combat ready and IAF is reluctantly inducting "only 324". Just that it will be the largest number of "non-combat ready" jet ever committed by IAF.

Stupid reporters.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 15 Mar 2018 00:30

Please don’t give Rajat Pandit viewership by posting his articles here.

By the way, I don’t know the numbers. But if development + acquisition cost of LCA is 100 million per plane, when development meant developing the entire ecosystem from designer to manufacturing to testing to certifying, then it is a damn economical plane.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 15 Mar 2018 02:19

With 90 Mn it has to be PBL costs too.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 15 Mar 2018 03:44

I don't know about cost numbers. But I will post the numbers that this "reporter" uses. I am very sure he has given every quarter to the imported fighters and taken every quarter away from LCA.

IAF has “firmly committed” to 123 Tejas jets at present, which will come at a cost of over Rs 75,000 crore if both developmental and production costs are taken into account.

He obviously justifies Rafales high costs citing PBL. But, forgets to say the same about Tejas Mark 1A.

The 36 Rafale jets, ordered from France in September 2016, for instance, have cost India Rs 59,000 crore. The total cost, of course, includes a decidedly deadly weapons package, all spares and costs for 75% fleet availability and “performance-based logistics support” for five years.
....
The contract for 83 Tejas Mark-1A fighters, which will cost around 50,000 crores, is in the process of being finalized now.

So how many LCAs for each Rafale?

Now sample this

The existing single-engine Tejas has limited “endurance” of just an hour, with a “radius of action” of only 350-400-km, and weapon-carrying capacity of 3-tonne. Other single-engine fighters like Swedish Gripen-E and American F-16 have roughly double the weapon-carrying capacity and triple the endurance.

He is not a dork. He has been in this business for over a decade. Even if I put Maruti 800's engine and fuel tank in an Ambassador chassis, the latter won't have 1/3 rd the range and 1/2 the payload. It is not difficult to understand this even if you are non-aviationist. By the way, the chassis of the ambassador (Tejas) in this case is lighter than the Maruti (Gripen).

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 15 Mar 2018 04:47

There would you consider re-engining Mk1A or leave it for the Mk2 to resolve that mismatch of engine & fuel tank vs body

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 15 Mar 2018 05:49

Khalsa wrote:There would you consider re-engining Mk1A or leave it for the Mk2 to resolve that mismatch of engine & fuel tank vs body

The whole idea behind Mk1A was to have an interim upgrade without an engine change

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Mar 2018 06:00

re-engined mk1 = mk2

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Mar 2018 06:01

I am loving it. It looks like by May 2019, there will be 1 SQ of LCA stood up, with second SQ taking planes. After 2 sq, it will be hard to stop it's mass induction, given that it is fairly advanced plane.