Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Indranil do you have any idea on status of NP-5 (Second LCA Navy trainer) which ADA is suppose to have started building as early as 2015
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
I don't know why IAF insists on that two-tone colour scheme for Tejas. None of the other fighters sport that toyish scheme.Kartik wrote: And could the IAF PLEASE take a look at how effective the navy's LCA color scheme looks versus the antiquated two tone scheme on IAF's Tejas fighters?!
No sir.Kakarat wrote:Indranil do you have any idea on status of NP-5 (Second LCA Navy trainer) which ADA is suppose to have started building as early as 2015
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Can’t wait for news! Already have visions in my head of the NLCA landing on the Vikrant as part of its first air group.Indranil wrote:Things are going to move fast on the NLCA in the next couple of weeks and months. Strap your belts!
Vikrant is expected for sea trials in late 2020 and hand over to Navy by 2021 with commissioning possibly in 2022 after wringing out by the IN.
Possible that the NLCA could be ready by then — four years from now? Weight was an issue cited by the Navy in 2016 but I don’t think DRDO ever stopped working on it.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 917
- Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Here is another shot of beauty NP-2 from yelahanka, too me this is what all the lca should look like :
http://www.airliners.net/photo/India-Na ... Bb9aL6k%3D
http://www.airliners.net/photo/India-Na ... Bb9aL6k%3D
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Very nice photo Krishna. The Naval Tejas is one beautiful aircraft.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Rakesh we at brf can hardly be called objective viewer of the Tejas in any of its forms.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Its heartening to see GoI revive the N-LCA project . Hope to see N-LCA or its variant on INS Vishal . What a sight it will be !!
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Indranil wrote:Things are going to move fast on the NLCA in the next couple of weeks and months. Strap your belts!
I assume that it will be made to operate from the Vikramaditya as a test case. That is he only inference that can be drawn from your post.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
The key would be to convince the IN to set aside its apprehension and purchase 3-4 squadrons of Tejas for Vikrant and Vikram. IN is quite adamant that N Tejas does not meet their need or requirements. Hope NS can convince them other wise.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Heavens no, not the Vishal. The MoD hasn’t even approved even a plan yet when even had we begun yesterday, it would not be ready until after 2030 going by our records.rohan1424 wrote:Its heartening to see GoI revive the N-LCA project . Hope to see N-LCA or its variant on INS Vishal . What a sight it will be !!
I hope to see it on the Vikrant.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Just imagine if two NLCAs are commissioned (mark 1 series) as Electronic Warfare Aircraft per aircraft carrier.
OMG 4 Mark 1 flying across two aircraft carriers.
I swear ... ladoo batunga !!
OMG 4 Mark 1 flying across two aircraft carriers.
I swear ... ladoo batunga !!
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
The IN is funding the NLCA so I believe it will buy if there is progress (in particular with the weight.) They were adamant when that report came out which coincided with the MiG-29K “needs to ruggedized” report. They had a turkey in the 29K and wanted a new carrier fighter. I think the NLCA simply got caught up in the Navy’s drive for the 57 RFI — they had to say something to justify the 57. The MoD would have asked them to wait for the NLCA.Austin wrote:The key would be to convince the IN to set aside its apprehension and purchase 3-4 squadrons of Tejas for Vikrant and Vikram. IN is quite adamant that N Tejas does not meet their need or requirements. Hope NS can convince them other wise.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
The last statement from IN chief was very crisp and clear that N-LCA does not meet their needs , Nothing has changed since then , Fall all you know ADA might be flying this to get expereince in building Naval fighters and IN too would support this.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
^^ That statement was a while ago and N-LCA has resumed flying is today. Is that not change? For all we know, IN may have changed their mind just not come out with it publicly after their bitter taste with the half-legged Roosi maal that spend more time on the ground than a dead eagle.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Its back with a bang. What a beauty. Hope it will not be forced to be a hanger queen anymore. Can't wait for it to start doing testing in Goa again and be back on the track.Kakarat wrote:jahaju wrote:Xposting
It’s alive! Naval LCA flew its first sortie today with tailhook. #Goa
https://twitter.com/SandeepUnnithan/sta ... 03073?s=19
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Naval staff requirement does not change in one year , the fundamental short fall mentioned by chief like short on range and payload ,single engine etc won’t change just because N Tejas started flying againKashi wrote:^^ That statement was a while ago and N-LCA has resumed flying is today. Is that not change? For all we know, IN may have changed their mind just not come out with it publicly after their bitter taste with the half-legged Roosi maal that spend more time on the ground than a dead eagle.
May be they can just induct a squadron just to get the experience of building a naval fighter and plan B if 57 bird RFI gets cancelled which loooks more likely given cost involved in that case IN May be forced to induct Tejas in large numbers
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Kashi wrote:^^ That statement was a while ago and N-LCA has resumed flying is today. Is that not change? For all we know, IN may have changed their mind just not come out with it publicly after their bitter taste with the half-legged Roosi maal that spend more time on the ground than a dead eagle.
Kashi ji, you are too harsh on the Roos. A dead eagle would be on the ground 100% of the time. CAG said the MiG-29K was on the ground between 63% and 84% of the time onlee.
https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 400918.cms
The availability rate ranged from 15.9 per cent to 37.63 per cent between 2010-14, the study revealed.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Peace time availability of any fighter is not the same as war time availability , IN can bump up operational availability of any fighter during war time like IAAF does during exercises or during Kargil ops
In fact during Kargil IN got most of its SHAR operational and even practised taking off from merchant ships as Viraat was under maintenance , less than half or just 1/3 shar used to be operational during normal times felt strength total was ~20
29K availability in 2010-14 is not the same as 2015-18
In fact during Kargil IN got most of its SHAR operational and even practised taking off from merchant ships as Viraat was under maintenance , less than half or just 1/3 shar used to be operational during normal times felt strength total was ~20
29K availability in 2010-14 is not the same as 2015-18
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
It’s headed there straightaway. Entrapments coming up soon.JayS wrote:Its back with a bang. What a beauty. Hope it will not be forced to be a hanger queen anymore. Can't wait for it to start doing testing in Goa again and be back on the track.Kakarat wrote:
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1021734038342717441
The link has a 15 sec video of LCA Navy deploying its tailhookFIRST VIDEO: LCA Navy NP2 flies for the first time with its tailhook on July 23 off Goa.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Not going to happen. The path here is quite straightforward and it is a development path. There is a need to do specific things to NLCA Mk1 with the 404 engine to continue to make it a naval fighter. This process culminates into the NLCA Mk2 with the 414 engine. Because of the way ADA has gone about this to create the LCA for the IAF first, deriving a naval version fighter from it is not straightforward, possible the other way around. Since the processes are divergent, there is no option but for the development of these two Mk2 versions to follow divergent paths (Tejas Mk2 and NLCA Mk2). It means investment, time and patience, along with the availability of resources.Austin wrote:The key would be to convince the IN to set aside its apprehension and purchase 3-4 squadrons of Tejas for Vikrant and Vikram. IN is quite adamant that N Tejas does not meet their need or requirements. Hope NS can convince them other wise.
The hope is someone higher up has banged some heads to form a plan and this is not just the development organization toying with things on their own. Not a bad thing to do but different from a deliberate planned action towards end objectives, duly funded.
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018
Great to see the hook coming out. Now what are the possibilities while testing this, i mean what could go wrong. So me the ace designer thinks
Primary objective - try to test the arrested landing hook functionality
Prerequisite - the aircraft shouldnt be affected adversely under any circumstance while trying to accomplish Primary objective
So what could happen?
1. the aircraft lands with the hook and doesnt catch the arrestor wires, i presume this will be tested on the SBTF? in such a case it will take the ramp again
2. the aircraft hits the hook but the hook breaks after decelerating the aircraft - this is worrisome, what will the pilot do
3. while 2 happens the aircraft gets yawed and then strays off course - another worrisome case
4. successful arrested landing
now that we are round the corner to test the arrested landing am excited and worried
Primary objective - try to test the arrested landing hook functionality
Prerequisite - the aircraft shouldnt be affected adversely under any circumstance while trying to accomplish Primary objective
So what could happen?
1. the aircraft lands with the hook and doesnt catch the arrestor wires, i presume this will be tested on the SBTF? in such a case it will take the ramp again
2. the aircraft hits the hook but the hook breaks after decelerating the aircraft - this is worrisome, what will the pilot do
3. while 2 happens the aircraft gets yawed and then strays off course - another worrisome case
4. successful arrested landing
now that we are round the corner to test the arrested landing am excited and worried
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018
Should not they first test the aircraft on normal airstrips with arrestor wire assembly like that of carrier forsuryag wrote: So what could happen?
1. the aircraft lands with the hook and doesnt catch the arrestor wires, i presume this will be tested on the SBTF? in such a case it will take the ramp again
2. the aircraft hits the hook but the hook breaks after decelerating the aircraft - this is worrisome, what will the pilot do
3. while 2 happens the aircraft gets yawed and then strays off course - another worrisome case
4. successful arrested landing
now that we are round the corner to test the arrested landing am excited and worried
1. Hone the skills to catch the wire, and
2. Test the integrity of hook assembly so that even if it breaks, the aricraft is fine and on the runway and there are other ways to stop...
Post this satisfactory results only, the aircraft should be put on SbTF facility or a carrier..
iMHO only
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018
They will do taxi trials with entrapment at increasing speeds till they reach carrier landing speeds.
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018
A noobie poochh but are we likely to see any developments from NLCA find their way into MK1A? Perhaps that is one of the motivations for reviving the NLCA programme.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Those NLCA Mk2 path is a long one would take a decade to get every thing done , They first buy Mk1 and fly off Vikrant/Vikram and walk the talk , Use what they have and then develop experience , combat and maintenance manual , overhaul etc in regular squadron service and fix any known fault as they fly day in and out ......There are tons of things IN can do with Mk1 before they can jump over to Mk2.
These tons of thing will help the navy in reducing the issue seen when they operate Mk2 in decade from now else they will have to fix this in Mk2 ...A squadron or two purchase will make a huge difference for IN and ADA and NLCA program
These tons of thing will help the navy in reducing the issue seen when they operate Mk2 in decade from now else they will have to fix this in Mk2 ...A squadron or two purchase will make a huge difference for IN and ADA and NLCA program
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Ladoo ? WOW!!! I am still waiting for some 6,000 MT of mithai from "somebody" for som3thing !!!!!Khalsa wrote:Just imagine if two NLCAs are commissioned (mark 1 series) as Electronic Warfare Aircraft per aircraft carrier.
OMG 4 Mark 1 flying across two aircraft carriers.
I swear ... ladoo batunga !!
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
I don't see IN inducting LCA MK1/2 when double engine AMCA is progressing. AMCA will meet IN's criteria of 2 engines, payload and range. Given that LCA MK2 & AMCA are almost at the same stage, waiting for few more years would get IN AMCA.
LCA Navy will continue testing and building our knowledge base. IN may place couple of them on carriers to test out ops needs, similar to what USN has done with UCVs.
These lessons will be feed in to AMCA Navy.
LCA Navy will continue testing and building our knowledge base. IN may place couple of them on carriers to test out ops needs, similar to what USN has done with UCVs.
These lessons will be feed in to AMCA Navy.
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018
I think that the NLCA is also being funded by the IN and developed by the ADA, mainly as a R&D project. Lessons learned will be incorporated elsewhere for sure.Kashi wrote:A noobie poochh but are we likely to see any developments from NLCA find their way into MK1A? Perhaps that is one of the motivations for reviving the NLCA programme.
It may even lead to a more acceptable platform and hopefully, sometime in the near to mid term.
In its current avatar, it will find no place in the IN inventory.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Kersi wrote:Ladoo ? WOW!!! I am still waiting for some 6,000 MT of mithai from "somebody" for som3thing !!!!!Khalsa wrote:Just imagine if two NLCAs are commissioned (mark 1 series) as Electronic Warfare Aircraft per aircraft carrier.
OMG 4 Mark 1 flying across two aircraft carriers.
I swear ... ladoo batunga !!
wait what did I promise that for (if I did)
come on come on
what was the something ?
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
How will NS do that?? and why should she do that??Austin wrote:The key would be to convince the IN to set aside its apprehension and purchase 3-4 squadrons of Tejas for Vikrant and Vikram. IN is quite adamant that N Tejas does not meet their need or requirements. Hope NS can convince them other wise.
The IN desperately wanted both projects to succeed. They put their money where their mouth is.
The IN did the same in the case of the unacceptable navalised ALH too. They were among the first, if not the first to support both projects. Rosy promises remain undelivered to date. The clamor for compromise rises by the day.
In the R&D world, eagerness is often mistaken for the willingness to compromise and accept shoddy products under the guise of "give us a chance" politics.
Operating out at sea and conducting non diversionary flying is a very different ball game. This is a brutal, take no prisoners kind of flying that few understand and fewer still are willing to bet on.
Edited Please do not use unsavory language
Its is not right to disparage one group working towards national interest over another
Let us hope that some technical solutions can be found and implemented so that the projects see successful completion and customer acceptance.
Sorry, was just about to delete that part when I saw your edit.
Last edited by chetak on 25 Jul 2018 14:47, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Khalsa wrote:Kersi wrote:
Ladoo ? WOW!!! snip......
wait what did I promise that for (if I did)
come on come on
what was the something ?
You are being used by the forum to remind some one else of his unfulfilled promise.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Chetakji, I understand. A carrier is not something you should accept unless with the utmost care and attention.chetak wrote:How will NS do that?? and why should she do that??Austin wrote:The key would be to convince the IN to set aside its apprehension and purchase 3-4 squadrons of Tejas for Vikrant and Vikram. IN is quite adamant that N Tejas does not meet their need or requirements. Hope NS can convince them other wise.
The IN desperately wanted both projects to succeed. They put their money where their mouth is.
The IN did the same in the case of the unacceptable navalised ALH too. They were among the first, if not the first to support both projects. Rosy promises remain undelivered to date. The clamor for compromise rises by the day.
In the R&D world, eagerness is often mistaken for the willingness to compromise and accept shoddy products under the guise of "give us a chance" politics.
Ignorant buggers in the PSUs and labs are never willing to put their own lives on the line but routinely demand that others do.
Operating out at sea and conducting non diversionary flying is a very different ball game. This is a brutal, take no prisoners kind of flying that few understand and fewer still are willing to bet on.
Let us hope that some technical solutions can be found and implemented so that the projects see successful completion and customer acceptance.
BUT what do we have now with the imported MiG-29K? Never mind the damning CAG report but more frightfully the Navy had said explicitly that this naval Fulcrum needs to be “ruggedized” and “re-calibrated” after landings. Why the hell should a purported carrier aircraft need to be “ruggedized”? Unless it was never fully navalized in the first place.
So would our Navy pilots be at any more risk with a NLCA than they are now? And yes, I know it is one engine versus two but there is also the high reliability of a GE F404 versus the rather infamous RD-33.
Yes, it is not my life being put on the line so it is not for me to tell the Navy to accept the NLCA just because it us domestic. But take the case of the chinis and the J-15. They could have simply bought carrier aircraft from Russia as we have. Instead, they have perservered with the loss of pilots and planes because they J-15 is theirs and it will inevitably increase their national capacity with every takeoff and landing it does.
I think their pilots who risk their lives on the J-15 know exactly what the stakes are for themselves and for the nation. I think our pilots would know so too if given the chance to fly our own plane off our carrier.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Their families certainly don't think so and family pressure can be very telling.chola wrote:Chetakji, I understand. A carrier is not something you should accept unless with the utmost care and attention.chetak wrote:
How will NS do that?? and why should she do that??
The IN desperately wanted both projects to succeed. They put their money where their mouth is.
The IN did the same in the case of the unacceptable navalised ALH too. They were among the first, if not the first to support both projects. Rosy promises remain undelivered to date. The clamor for compromise rises by the day.
In the R&D world, eagerness is often mistaken for the willingness to compromise and accept shoddy products under the guise of "give us a chance" politics.
Operating out at sea and conducting non diversionary flying is a very different ball game. This is a brutal, take no prisoners kind of flying that few understand and fewer still are willing to bet on.
Let us hope that some technical solutions can be found and implemented so that the projects see successful completion and customer acceptance.
BUT what do we have now with the imported MiG-29K? Never mind the damning CAG report but more frightfully the Navy had said explicitly that this naval Fulcrum needs to be “ruggedized” and “re-calibrated” after landings. Why the hell should a purported carrier aircraft need to be “ruggedized”? Unless it was never fully navalized in the first place.
So would our Navy pilots be at any more risk with a NLCA than they are now? And yes, I know it is one engine versus two but there is also the high reliability of a GE F404 versus the rather infamous RD-33.
Yes, it is not my life being put on the line so it is not for me to tell the Navy to accept the NLCA just because it us domestic. But take the case of the chinis and the J-15. They could have simply bought carrier aircraft from Russia as we have. Instead, they have perservered with the loss of pilots and planes because they J-15 is theirs and it will inevitably increase their national capacity with every takeoff and landing it does.
I think their pilots who risk their lives on the J-15 know exactly what the stakes are for themselves and for the nation. I think our pilots would know so too if given the chance to fly our own plane off our carrier.
The civil airlines have mostly benefited from such pressure.
A great many ex military aviator types have simply migrated to safer and more lucrative commercial flying.
This is not the type of loss we can sustain without paying a "grave" penalty.
Everyone contributes but with the sole exception of a wartime scenario, it is not fair nor realistic to expect such an unequal contribution from any one single section of the MIC ecosystem.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Austin. Are you trying to justify the poor availiblity of IN's MiG 29 with some data on SHAR ? What is the basis of this comparison ? NONE as I see. What is the objective of this comparison ? To prove that MiG 29 is not a bad aircraft !!!!Austin wrote:Peace time availability of any fighter is not the same as war time availability , IN can bump up operational availability of any fighter during war time like IAAF does during exercises or during Kargil ops
In fact during Kargil IN got most of its SHAR operational and even practised taking off from merchant ships as Viraat was under maintenance , less than half or just 1/3 shar used to be operational during normal times felt strength total was ~20
29K availability in 2010-14 is not the same as 2015-18
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Austin wrote:Those NLCA Mk2 path is a long one would take a decade to get every thing done , They first buy Mk1 and fly off Vikrant/Vikram and walk the talk , Use what they have and then develop experience , combat and maintenance manual , overhaul etc in regular squadron service and fix any known fault as they fly day in and out ......There are tons of things IN can do with Mk1 before they can jump over to Mk2.
These tons of thing will help the navy in reducing the issue seen when they operate Mk2 in decade from now else they will have to fix this in Mk2 ...A squadron or two purchase will make a huge difference for IN and ADA and NLCA program
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
I think i a misunderstoodKhalsa wrote:Kersi wrote:
Ladoo ? WOW!!! I am still waiting for some 6,000 MT of mithai from "somebody" for som3thing !!!!!
wait what did I promise that for (if I did)
come on come on
what was the something ?
I mean "I am still waiting for those 6,000 MT of mithai from "somebody" for something !!!!!
I am waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and waiting, till all the neutrons have been used up !!!!!!
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Once you allow the import (of a shq), all desi (mithai) delivery are starved of fund only.Kersi wrote:I think i a misunderstoodKhalsa wrote:
wait what did I promise that for (if I did)
come on come on
what was the something ?
I mean "I am still waiting for those 6,000 MT of mithai from "somebody" for something !!!!!
I am waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and waiting, till all the neutrons have been used up !!!!!!
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
Maybe it can be used as a shore based trainer and still perform a useful role by carrying out arrested landings when the platform is available.Kersi wrote:Austin wrote:Those NLCA Mk2 path is a long one would take a decade to get every thing done , They first buy Mk1 and fly off Vikrant/Vikram and walk the talk , Use what they have and then develop experience , combat and maintenance manual , overhaul etc in regular squadron service and fix any known fault as they fly day in and out ......There are tons of things IN can do with Mk1 before they can jump over to Mk2.
These tons of thing will help the navy in reducing the issue seen when they operate Mk2 in decade from now else they will have to fix this in Mk2 ...A squadron or two purchase will make a huge difference for IN and ADA and NLCA program
It is not entirely realistic to see an operational role for this aircraft in its present development status and growth limitations, constrained as they are by many factors.
Re: Naval LCA - News and Discussion
MiG-29K availability issues aside, it is an in-service aircraft whose net availability can be boosted by acquiring more of the same type.
If IN wants to operate 3 carriers then the best bet would be to acquire 2 more squadrons of Fulcrums and 1 more Vikrant carrier.
NLCA may come along in the meantime and may see service for limited but crucial roles such as air defence and carrier qualification of pilots. Naval air power will also be exercised by shore based MRAs and shipborne choppers.
I believe this is the most viable path to a full complement air wing at sea.
If IN wants to operate 3 carriers then the best bet would be to acquire 2 more squadrons of Fulcrums and 1 more Vikrant carrier.
NLCA may come along in the meantime and may see service for limited but crucial roles such as air defence and carrier qualification of pilots. Naval air power will also be exercised by shore based MRAs and shipborne choppers.
I believe this is the most viable path to a full complement air wing at sea.