LCA news and discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5564
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Cain Marko »

Anand wrote:Does any one here know when the LCA Tejas finally gets inducted (2010????) what capability will it give the IAF????
will it b a mere mig-21 replacement or a much more capable multirole aircraft. In 2001, Kota Hariranya the pm of the lca project had claimed lca would be comparable to the best in the world.............. :?:
Do read up on the LCA a bit. Most of your questions will be answered. The current mk1s should be comparable to the Gripen A and the mk2 (2014) closer to the NG or at least C versions. The mig-21, even the bison simply doesnt have that sort of capability.

CM.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5872
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Kartik »

negi wrote:Yes I know ..my intention by listing those AAM missiles and weight figures was to highlight the fact that 90+kg category WVAAM were in service since 80's , it is imperative that any aircraft which enters service in 90's or even later should be able to carry a WVAAM in above class.
Negi, as a designer, its not that hard to configure the Tejas to carry even a R-77 on its outermost pylons- you strengthen the spars, wing ribs, and other structural parts, but the point is where was the IAF when ADA went ahead and designed the outermost pylons to carry R-60s ? what kind of project review and management was the IAF doing for the LCA in the early and mid-90s or even the late 90s ? how come they only came up with revised GSQRs after the LCA had been test flown over a 100 times. were they not aware that it was being designed to carry R-60s ? or were they simply waiting for the LCA program to die out so they could import a foreign product and so didn't bother ?

see, its easy to blame the DRDO and ADA for every evil that besets Indian defence, but the truth is some share of the blame lies with the IAF as well. to specify the exact requirements is the customer's job, not the developer's. if you just put them in their own bubble and expect that based off vague (as you say the original GSQRs were) requirements they'd come up with the perfect product, then it means you share the blame if the final product doesn't exactly match what you dreamt of. thats what project management is all about.
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

I have a question on the LCA version that can go into production at this point in time (With all the shortcomings that it currently has, like the inability to carry R-77, low engine power, etc.)

If this version is still better than MIG21 bisons, it should replace the atleast the Mig-21bis and older versions which are to retire. Why do we want the GE414 engine when even with the GE404 / Kaveri, the LCA is better than any Mig21 ?

Especially since the bisons shall see service till 2025!
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Rahul M »

Mayuresh wrote:I have a question on the LCA version that can go into production at this point in time (With all the shortcomings that it currently has, like the inability to carry R-77, low engine power, etc.)
arrrrrrrrrrrr.......... :x

where did you get that bit ??
karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 705
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by karan_mc »

Newbies please visit www.lca-tejas.org or wiki to get basic info on Tejas
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1678
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by andy B »

Mayuresh wrote:I have a question on the LCA version that can go into production at this point in time (With all the shortcomings that it currently has, like the inability to carry R-77, low engine power, etc.)

If this version is still better than MIG21 bisons, it should replace the atleast the Mig-21bis and older versions which are to retire. Why do we want the GE414 engine when even with the GE404 / Kaveri, the LCA is better than any Mig21 ?

Especially since the bisons shall see service till 2025!
Errr....Mayuresh a word of advice please do some basic research and you will have answers on the above questions.

For starters I can tell you that the Astra will be on the LCA. I believe that the Astra will take precedence over the R77 in BVR and in WVR the R73 has already being trialled.

The next bit about the GE414 or EJ200 powered MKII is what the IAF wants the LCA to be!

The revised LCA MKII will in effect be a lot different I may even dare say "newer" than what you see currently as with the change there will be increased payload, range, ityadi.

The current version will indeed see a limited LSP run which IIRC is limited to 20 nos.

The revised MKII is what will form the light category of combat ac in the IAF in the near future with the medium being taken up by the MRCA and the heavy being taken up by the MKI while PAK FA/MCA will be slot in the medium or heavy category depending on how it turns out.

The originial LCA was how it was when the program first started but due to a lot of recent developments the customer has now come up with requirements that are different from what was inititally laid out.

Mind you this LCA MKII will in effect be very similar to a Gripen or a F Solah which again might have implications for the MRCA contenders.

Thus in the current form the LCA will only have 20 nos inservice bcoz thats what the IAF wants and hence thats what the ADA/DRDO will do.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Rahul M »

karan_mc wrote:Newbies please visit http://www.lca-tejas.org or wiki to get basic info on Tejas
in fact, read everything that is there in the first post on this thread.
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Rahul M wrote:
karan_mc wrote:Newbies please visit http://www.lca-tejas.org or wiki to get basic info on Tejas
in fact, read everything that is there in the first post on this thread.
I read all possible web pages but still did not have a satisfactory answer

My bad... did not frame the question right. Let me try again

From what I gather, the LCA shall replace our MIG-21 fleet. Initially, i shall replace all variants of the MiG21 other than bison. The bisons shall be replaced in 2025, as they are deemed good enough thill then.

My question is:
1. Why are we not iducting the LCA in large numbers right away?

No where did I find any issue other than the IAF saying that the 85KN power is too low and that a good power for the engine would be 95-100KN. However, the power-to-weight ratio is still wa better than the Mig21. If the bisons can fly till 2025 with a lower power, so sould the LCA. Redesigining the airframe (to fit the GE414 / Eurojet 2000) shall take time, so induct as many LCAs as we can now to atleast fill up some of the shortage of squardrons.

2. How many craft are we inducting with the GE404?
I did not find a definite answer to this one. Some sources say 1 squadron only, some other say 2 squadrons, most do not put any number

It seems to me that with the LCA, we are waiting for some fantastic aircraft that may be delivered in the future and are rejecting a good aircraft that is available NOW. There is obviously something that I am missing, else the LCA would have been inducted. What am I not taking into consideration
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Rahul M »

very perceptive post mayuresh.
you are right on the money on most things.

as to your question,
Mayuresh wrote: My question is:
1. Why are we not iducting the LCA in large numbers right away?
you have answered yourself.
It seems to me that with the LCA, we are waiting for some fantastic aircraft that may be delivered in the future and are rejecting a good aircraft that is available NOW.
as Admiral Gorshkov used to say, "better is the enemy of the good enough".

fact is, there has been considerable scope creep in the project
OBOGs, full internal EW suite, change to open architecture etc to name a few.

had that not happened we would probably have had the LCA flying with IAF by now.

even then, not all is lost, if we expect IOC by sometime in early 2012, by the time the production run for LCA Mk1 is completed (20 in number, so there you have your figure :) ) LCA Mk2 is expected to be ready for production (2013-14)
expected orders for Mk2 are 140.

it's a tight schedule but with the experience of the last few years hopefully they can keep to it.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Vivek K »

Mayuresh wrote:My question is:
1. Why are we not iducting the LCA in large numbers right away?

......However, the power-to-weight ratio is still wa better than the Mig21. If the bisons can fly till 2025 with a lower power, so sould the LCA. Redesigining the airframe (to fit the GE414 / Eurojet 2000) shall take time, so induct as many LCAs as we can now to atleast fill up some of the shortage of squardrons.
.......
It seems to me that with the LCA, we are waiting for some fantastic aircraft that may be delivered in the future and are rejecting a good aircraft that is available NOW. There is obviously something that I am missing, else the LCA would have been inducted. What am I not taking into consideration
You are mistaking the corruption factor. If the LCA had been TOTed to Boeing/Mig then by now we would have imported a 1,000 LCAs at least.

BTW you are absolutely correct - the LCA is ready now!! Why don't we order 400 GE404s and start cloning 200 - 300 LCAs immediately. Every Mig-21 squadron phased out should be replaced with a LCA squadron.

To answer your question - its all in the name bud! ABV gave the LCA a wimpy name. Poet's don't fight nor do they win wars. How about the Mig-61 or the F-61 Avenger/Lightning/Ajai or some such?? The wisdom of the IAF in pusrsuing the SU-30, MRCA, the FGFA, the LCA is not clear. Take what you have now and build up operational tactics to defeat the enemy than wait for the BMW-7 series that you may not have the time to develop tactics for.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5872
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Kartik »

Mayuresh wrote:I have a question on the LCA version that can go into production at this point in time (With all the shortcomings that it currently has, like the inability to carry R-77, low engine power, etc.)
who told you that the Tejas won't be able to carry R-77s ? it hasn't been integrated with the R-77 as yet, because its not yet flown with a radar..the R-77 will definitely be the first guided weapon that the Tejas will fire.
If this version is still better than MIG21 bisons, it should replace the atleast the Mig-21bis and older versions which are to retire. Why do we want the GE414 engine when even with the GE404 / Kaveri, the LCA is better than any Mig21 ?
Especially since the bisons shall see service till 2025!
The Bisons will start retiring in 2013-2014 or thereabouts. there is no way that its original MiG-21Bis airframe can be extended beyond that period.

hopefully by then the 40 odd LCA Mk.1s on order will be fully operational and that should address some of the shortfall. However, its not a good idea to buy engines worth $3-5 million each (the GE F-404 IN20) and then replace them well before even scheduled MTBO to put in the F-414 or EJ200 (which is what would happen if the IAF inducted any more Tejas Mk.1s).

so, the approach that the IAF will take is to buy and induct 40 Tejas Mk.1 and then fund the Mk.2 and hopefully ADA and HAL will be able to deliver it in time, so that it enters squadron service starting around 2015-16.
Last edited by Kartik on 01 Sep 2009 03:21, edited 1 time in total.
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Vivek K wrote: To answer your question - its all in the name bud! ABV gave the LCA a wimpy name. Poet's don't fight nor do they win wars. How about the Mig-61 or the F-61 Avenger/Lightning/Ajai or some such??
We are lucky that it is the LCA that is called Tejas and not the FGFA.

Think about it, an aircraft that is designed to be stealthy being called "radiant". Also, as quoted by an IAF spokesperson, the LCA too has some in-built stealth due to its small size and the composites used in its construction. And we call it "Tejas" - ... (read picked up by enemy radars :) )

On a more serious note, I also read that an ex-IAF officer recommended that we start the fishbed assembly line again and churn out bisons by the ton ... overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers... especially since the marginal cost of manufacturing an extra bison is quite low
narmad
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by narmad »

On a more serious note, I also read that an ex-IAF officer recommended that we start the fishbed assembly line again and churn out bisons by the ton ... overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers... especially since the marginal cost of manufacturing an extra bison is quite low
What you mean is use Mig21 as cannon fodder ? What about the pilots
Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Gaur »

Mayuresh wrote: On a more serious note, I also read that an ex-IAF officer recommended that we start the fishbed assembly line again and churn out bisons by the ton ... overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers... especially since the marginal cost of manufacturing an extra bison is quite low
I am almost blinded by this dazzling display of wit! No doubt there are thousands of SDRE pilots shoving each other from the queue in front of suicide mission registration office.
I would really like to read this excellent article by an "ex-IAF" officer. I would like to meet this person and witness the awe inspiring splendour of his wit.

PS: I really doubt that such article exists. Surely no one could be brilliant enough to write such a thing, leave alone a SDRE EX-IAF.
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Parijat Gaur wrote:
Mayuresh wrote: On a more serious note, I also read that an ex-IAF officer recommended that we start the fishbed assembly line again and churn out bisons by the ton ... overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers... especially since the marginal cost of manufacturing an extra bison is quite low
I am almost blinded by this dazzling display of wit! No doubt there are thousands of SDRE pilots shoving each other from the queue in front of suicide mission registration office.
I would really like to read this excellent article by an "ex-IAF" officer. I would like to meet this person and witness the awe inspiring splendour of his wit.

PS: I really doubt that such article exists. Surely no one could be brilliant enough to write such a thing, leave alone a SDRE EX-IAF.
Looks like I make stupid statements all the while... My bad again ... I read too much into the quote by the Air Commodore, I guess...
My statement "churn out bisons by the ton ... overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers... especially since the marginal cost of manufacturing an extra bison is quite low" - this probably is putting words into the commodore's mouth. I am sure the commodore did not want our pilots to be cannon fodder. But he still recommended opeining the mig-21 assembly line again (he recommended it in 2001) to build ~250 aircraft and upgrade the already existing ones.

Anyways, here is the news item I was refering to. Appeared in 2001 in the Tribune, quotes Air Commodore Jasjit Singh (retd), Director of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/20010115/nation.htm#10

‘Open’ MiG-21 assembly line to fight shortage

NEW DELHI, Jan 14 (PTI) — By the time the newly tested indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA) is inducted into the IAF over the coming decade, the IAF would already be facing a shortage of nearly 250 fighter aircraft, which can be made good by reopening the assembly line of MiG-21s in addition to their upgradation, which is already underway, says Air Commodore Jasjit Singh (retd), Director of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses.

“Considering the losses and ageing of the aircraft, we would require at least 35 new aircraft every year over the next 10 years, to maintain a fully fit and fighting fleet at current strength,” notes Air Commodore Singh taking into account the 40 Sukhois we’ll be getting in the near future as well as the licensed manufacture of 140 more over a period of 17 years.

Given that the first manufacture of Su-30s, subsequent to the October, 2000, deal, is still three years away and on an average around 10 to 11 aircraft would be produced in a year, then by 2010 the IAF would have just about added 70-odd Su-30s to its then existing fleet of 40, says the Defence analyst, adding that it would still leave a wide gap or requirement of 240 in 2010.

Despite the reports of buying around 10 Mirages and 8 — 10 Jaguars, that would just be enough to make up the existing wastage, meaning no real net gain to the country’s air force,” says Air Commodore Jasjit Singh.

The quickest and most cost-effective way of making good this perceived deficit would be to reopen the assembly line of MiG-21s, and go in for immediate purchase of 96 MiG-29s available with the Russians and get these upgraded to the required specifications, says the IDSA Director.

“We could negotiate with the Russians for the purchase of these aircraft, which are not likely to cost more than $ 20 million a piece,” he says.

“Even more cost effective,” he argues, “would be reopening the assembly line of MiG-21s, which when we closed manufacturing in the 80s used to cost $ 1 million a piece. Today, it would cost around $ 4 million (the upgraded versions) and another $ 2 million if the cost escalation is taken into account.

The upgrade package of MiG, which incorporates advanced avionics and features like target acquisition, was jointly developed and certified by the IAF, and Russia's Sokol Nizhny Novograd aircraft building plant and the state-owned avionics testing and integration establishment, according to information at the website of the IAF.

Having been flown by nearly all pilots, from the Air Chief to the youngest of them, MiG-21s still remain the best bet, as its maintenance too is not going to be too problematic given that nearly all stations in the country are familiar with it, he says.

Rebutting the popular perception that the aircraft are flying coffins, the defence analyst, who has also served as Director of Flight Safety during service, says that the aircraft still is one of the best designed.

Agreeing with him, another senior retired IAF official, says “the accident rate of MiGs is more visible because of a variety of reasons, mainly because of the size of the fleet, the amount the aircraft flies and the fact that it is also used for training.”

Nonetheless, both experts point that, the plane has its own limitations, in that being driven by a single engine, in case of a bird hit, it leads to the loss of the engine, and even the pilot sometimes. Yet another limitation, prior to upgradation, is that the aircraft has no cooling system for pilots, which is strenuous on the pilot flying it in the summer.
Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1341
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Nihat »

It may well have been considered then but it's not an option now , especially in a time when we're looking to maintain a qualitative edge over PLAAF and PAF . Mig-21 and all it's variants are 3rd generation and no amount of upgrades can make them leap a generation especially in terms of airframe and range of operational tasks it can carry out.

If we could only get the LSP-3 in the air and carry out weapons trial subsequently the LCA would be very much active.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5872
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Kartik »

Parijat Gaur wrote:I am almost blinded by this dazzling display of wit! No doubt there are thousands of SDRE pilots shoving each other from the queue in front of suicide mission registration office.
I would really like to read this excellent article by an "ex-IAF" officer. I would like to meet this person and witness the awe inspiring splendour of his wit.

PS: I really doubt that such article exists. Surely no one could be brilliant enough to write such a thing, leave alone a SDRE EX-IAF.
why look beyond even BRF ? posters who are greatly respected by some on this forum, have in the not so distant past, suggested that more Bisons should've been bought and even that more Jags be bought in place of the MRCA to serve till 2030s. are the Jags any less cannon fodder than the MiG-21s ?
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Vivek K »

Kartik,

What is the rationale behind the MRCA purchase? 126 + 63 on option - Fleet enhnacement. When was the idea first mooted? 2001-2002? How much fleet enhancement has occured with retiring Mi21 F, FL, PF, M and MF, Mig23 MF and BN? If the Babus and the top brass are left at it, it could still take a while for the actual delivery of the MRCAs. The only firm plan is additional MKIs and the LSP + 20 production LCAs. So granted the limited capabiility of the bisons, are they better than having a true stealthy (read non-existant) MRCA? Or should we start building trebuchets?

We need to do something!!! Either get the MRCA now or build more bisons/old Mig-29s/Ukranian Su-27s/Qatari M2ks?
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1678
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by andy B »

X posting a statement from the ebil mullah from Khybedurra :twisted:

Thanks Allah, if some one ask the same question as to why IAF has not placed order for 200 unqualified LCA flying the skies. They should trust the words of Kaveri designers, put them in and fly 200 unqualified/non-weaponized LCA. Someone misses the simple fact that only after LCA has demonstarted performance and capability it will be used as a weapon for war.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Vivek K »

andy B wrote:X posting a statement from the ebil mullah from Khybedurra :twisted:

Thanks Allah, if some one ask the same question as to why IAF has not placed order for 200 unqualified LCA flying the skies. They should trust the words of Kaveri designers, put them in and fly 200 unqualified/non-weaponized LCA. Someone misses the simple fact that only after LCA has demonstarted performance and capability it will be used as a weapon for war.
And so all the news about A2G modes on the MMR working, missiles launch videos and ground attack precision tests is false? I guess then we must start preparing slingshots and trebuchets. They will perhaps be more effective than the "unqualified/non-weaponized LCA". Trebuchets can perhaps be even qualified by the MOD Babus, all it will take is a few crates of Johnny Walker Black label.
veerav
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 06 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: us

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by veerav »

With the latest news on Pokran-2, Chandrayan-1, LCA R-77, Kaveri, Lack of foresight by IAF On the stage-1 trainer, never ending user trials of missiles, and so on and on and on.....Can we trust the PSU's and Services as far as our countries' defense is concerned? How long we support them with age old arguments such as 'low pay','complex technology', 'building from scratch', 'LCA development is next to the creation of life', etc?

Solution -

1. Privatize HAL and NDA Or entrust development of an aircraft to Ambanies or TATA. Chances are more than 50% that they could operationlize their product before LCA.
2. Announce $1 Billion prize for someone who could come up with a plan to take out the critical defense development from DRDO. Announce $0.5 billion more for someone who can suggest a way to make DRDO divert its energies to develop 'Diapers' (Buron?) rather than poking their nose everywhere.
3. Make ISRO leadership sit in Parliament to learn how to speak politically correct so that they won't make mistake of making tall claims.
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1678
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by andy B »

Vivek K wrote: And so all the news about A2G modes on the MMR working, missiles launch videos and ground attack precision tests is false? I guess then we must start preparing slingshots and trebuchets. They will perhaps be more effective than the "unqualified/non-weaponized LCA". Trebuchets can perhaps be even qualified by the MOD Babus, all it will take is a few crates of Johnny Walker Black label.
The proof is in the pudding...where does it say in the whole post that the testing is false?

I am a staunch supporter of the LCA but it is in the pipeline also there are a lot of problems with the MMR that are currently being sorted out add to that the whole MK2 drama....what little I know about the LCA is based on ACM Philip Rajkumar's book and following the articles in this thread...obviously it is no where near to what you know so I shall humbly accept your argument about slingshots and Johny Black...
Ranvijay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 17 Oct 2007 18:28

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Ranvijay »

We need to do something!!! Either get the MRCA now or build more bisons/old Mig-29s/Ukranian Su-27s/Qatari M2ks?
All the while losing pilots to private airlines cause they offer better packages. Just say it straight, bro, you need stuff for wikipedia fights with some pukes...
Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Jagan »

ABV gave the LCA a wimpy name
:rotfl: :rotfl:
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Parijat Gaur wrote:
Mayuresh wrote: On a more serious note, I also read that an ex-IAF officer recommended that we start the fishbed assembly line again and churn out bisons by the ton ... overwhelm the enemy by sheer numbers... especially since the marginal cost of manufacturing an extra bison is quite low
I am almost blinded by this dazzling display of wit! No doubt there are thousands of SDRE pilots shoving each other from the queue in front of suicide mission registration office.
I would really like to read this excellent article by an "ex-IAF" officer. I would like to meet this person and witness the awe inspiring splendour of his wit.

PS: I really doubt that such article exists. Surely no one could be brilliant enough to write such a thing, leave alone a SDRE EX-IAF.
Can some of the BR Gurus throw light on why the Air Commodore ( http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/20010115/nation.htm#10 ) may have wanted more Bisons despite the obvious fact that they may become cannon fodder? Or was our situation in 2001 so bad (read low # of fighters) that we needed to incorporate 3rd gen. bisons or any aircraft that we could lay our hands on... Also, the bisons that we have currently shall serve us till 2025 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-21#For ... t_variants). A wing commander (Late WC Dheeraj Bhatia, my friend's cousin) once told me that the IAF bisons could easily trump the PAF F-16 if we have a ratio of better than 3 (bison) : 2 (F-16), and that the IAF bisons were enough to take care of the PAF provided we have the requisite numbers. Surely, he was not talking about bisons being cannon fodder, but yet, overwhelming the PAF with numerical supriority.

And the LCA (one vailable currently, with GE404, etc.) is much better than the bisons. Surely, it can take on the PAF F-16 in a similar ratio.

As I said earlier, the IAF is waiting for some fantastic aircraft that MAY be delivered somewhere in the future and rejecting a good aircraft that is available NOW
Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Jagan »

Kartik wrote:and regarding the Bison flying with 2 R-73s and the initial Tejas demonstrator not being able to do that, keep in mind that the MiG-21 only has 2 pylons on each wing and that meant that almost always, the outermost pylon was the only one that carried any A2A weaponry because the inboard pylons were wet. on some rare occasions, the MiG-21 carried multiple AA-6s on a multiple ejection racks, but in a air-ground config, it would carry bombs or rockets on those outboard pylons. if they were not stressed to take such heavy loads, the MiG-21 would be handicapped with a much much shorter range.

Actually the Bison/Bis does have wet pylons on the outboard. And it has been seen flying with tanks outboard. Infact most of the Bis that fly that i have seen use tanks on the outboard pylons.

Image

Image
Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Jagan »

Mayuresh wrote:

Can some of the BR Gurus throw light on why the Air Commodore ( http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/20010115/nation.htm#10 ) may have wanted more Bisons despite the obvious fact that they may become cannon fodder?

What makes you think they will be cannon fodder? What is the scenario that you think it will be used in?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Singha »

but problem is the OEM designs of Mig21 were NOT txed to India. we depended on a lot of parts from ussr and later salvaged parts from eastern europe. many of the old vendors are probably gone for good.

it will have to be a super expensive line with 100% parts made in India from scratch...as costly as the MRCA line.

and MRCA will be hugely superior in every role to Bison.

bottom line - we are not the USSR, we dont have huge industrial complex and
designs ready to roll at drop of a hat.
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Jagan wrote:
Mayuresh wrote:

Can some of the BR Gurus throw light on why the Air Commodore ( http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/20010115/nation.htm#10 ) may have wanted more Bisons despite the obvious fact that they may become cannon fodder?

What makes you think they will be cannon fodder? What is the scenario that you think it will be used in?
Jagan,
I envisage them being used for point defense PAF F-16s / PAF MiG-21 and against Chinese J10 or J11/Su-27. We do not know the true capabilities of the J-10 (never mind all publically available information, I trust the PLAAF and Chinese media to lie more often than not). The question is, will the bisons/ LCA in its current form be able to take on the J10 and J11? Or will they be cannon fodder?

I don't want to hazard a random guess and end up making stupid statements again.
Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Jagan »

Mayuresh wrote:[
I envisage them being used for point defense PAF F-16s / PAF MiG-21 and against Chinese J10 or J11/Su-27. We do not know the true capabilities of the J-10 (never mind all publically available information, I trust the PLAAF and Chinese media to lie more often than not). The question is, will the bisons/ LCA in its current form be able to take on the J10 and J11? Or will they be cannon fodder? again.
In a point defence role, the defender is at an advantage over the attacker. You have fuel, you have range, you have own radar coverage, you have ground based SAMs, and guns that the attacker doesnt.

Unless the chinese J-10/J-11 is some super duper cheeni version of the F-22 with fantastic ECCM and AESA , I wouldnt worry much about 'cannon fodder'
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Jagan wrote:
In a point defence role, the defender is at an advantage over the attacker. You have fuel, you have range, you have own radar coverage, you have ground based SAMs, and guns that the attacker doesnt.

Unless the chinese J-10/J-11 is some super duper cheeni version of the F-22 with fantastic ECCM and AESA , I wouldnt worry much about 'cannon fodder'
The Chinese Su-27 shall have similar or maybe more fuel and range even in an attack mode when they reach India (say Tawang or Sikkim) than the Mig-21. They have a better manouverability than the bisons. Both countries shall have AWACS, so radar coverage would pretty much be the same.

Plus, what if the Chinese decide to overwhelm us with numbers (lots of J10 coming at once)? They are definitely known to do that.

The only advantage we would have is ground based SAMs.

The first wave of attackers would definitely not be A-G but A-A to dominate our airspace
Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Jagan »

Mayuresh wrote: Plus, what if the Chinese decide to overwhelm us with numbers (lots of J10 coming at once)? They are definitely known to do that. The only advantage we would have is ground based SAMs. The first wave of attackers would definitely not be A-G but A-A to dominate our airspace

Overwhelm us with Numbers is a favourite scenario on BRF - but its not a realistic one.. Overwhelming numbers if ever will see an overwhelming response. With the AWACS et all, you could probably see a fighter taking off even before it gets off the ground in Tibet.

Sending A-A only is a bad strategy. What happens if your enemy doesnt take the bait? The A-A attackers cannot come close to your airspace for fear of SAMS , AA, they have to send in A-G at the same time.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Sanku »

-- wrong person --
Last edited by Sanku on 01 Sep 2009 12:40, edited 1 time in total.
Mayuresh
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 16:01

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Mayuresh »

Sanku,
Alright!

Coming back to the LCA and Mig21 arguement, all I would like to see is more number of LCA Mark1 being inducted till such time we do not start production of LCA Mark2
Last edited by Mayuresh on 01 Sep 2009 15:18, edited 1 time in total.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Sanku »

Mayuresh wrote:
Sanku wrote:
Are you by any chance xyz?
Sanku,
Would appreciate if you refrain from making personal comments. Anyways, I have absolutely no idea who "Pagla Patil" is/was or what you are referring to when you ask me that question
This was not a personal comment, if you thought so then it is clear that you are not the xyz I wanted. If you are and dont want to say it here you can drop me a line at <>

I know the xyz so I asked. I will delete the address in a few moments Please also edit your post to delete the reference to the person named.
Last edited by Sanku on 01 Sep 2009 13:09, edited 1 time in total.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by tsarkar »

We’re going off topic here, but

Cluttering the seas, skies or ground with numbers makes those forces lose freedom to maneuver.

They bunch up without any space to move being easy targets for missiles (in the present day), torpedoes (WW Atlantic convoys), cannon (battle of Khanua) or mounted archers (second battle of Tarain)

Secondly, in a bunch, only the forward line & flanks can use their weapons. Those in the inside lines stay cramped and have nothing to do, being useless in battles

Winning sides are those who’ve maximized effects, ie, ensuring firepower is concentrated exactly where it’s needed most.

Indians need to rid themselves of larger numbers or better gizmos mentality. It’s entirely possible to win wars with lesser numbers or less sophisticated but reliable equipment.

In Kargil, IA lost its numerical advantage because a mountain ridgeline or trail could accommodate only a finite number of personnel.
Last edited by tsarkar on 01 Sep 2009 13:11, edited 1 time in total.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by tsarkar »

Numbers are important for attrition replacement (Liberty ships – build them faster than the Germans can sink them).

Numbers are important for coverage, not in space but in time.

To explain better, if you have 96 planes, you don’t put all 96 in the air at the same time. It’s a pain coordinating since all 96 cannot take off at the same time, so you lose fuel and pilot fatigue waiting for everyone to take off and assemble.

Assuming 1 hour time over target, you ensure there are 4 planes over the required aerospace for 24 hours (4x24=96). Enemy planes have to land to refuel and AD personnel need to eat, sleep and relieve themselves. That is when you literally catch them on the ground / napping / with their pants down.

Quantity COMPLEMENTS quality, but cannot SUPPLEMENT it.
Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Gaur »

This is an interesting discussion. I see there is some favor for buying more bisons! I could see "some" sense in that in 2000-2001 when the situation was even more desperate. At that time, MRCA and LCA looked like distant dreams. But why is there such favor for bisons now? Surely they are good a/cs but if some urgent stopgap measures have to be taken, would it not be more prudent to buy more lca and Su-35 (single seat variant considering the pilot shortage). After all, neither of the two a/c is too costly.
I for myself have repeatedly failed to understand the rationale behind MRCA.
The sheer types of a/cs our AF operates is bind boggling. And we are hellbent on adding MRCA to that. I personally feel that instead of MRCA, more Su-35BMs should be urgently bought. It will have huge commonality with MKI and being a single seater, it will have advantage considering our pilot shortages.
The only sense I see in MRCA is the TOT. But even that could have been acquired though russians.
But this is getting way OT. I would suggest continuing any furthur dscussion on this topic in "Indian Military Aviation" thread.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5564
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Cain Marko »

Parijat Gaur wrote:This is an interesting discussion. I see there is some favor for buying more bisons! I could see "some" sense in that in 2000-2001 when the situation was even more desperate. At that time, MRCA and LCA looked like distant dreams. But why is there such favor for bisons now? Surely they are good a/cs but if some urgent stopgap measures have to be taken, would it not be more prudent to buy more lca and Su-35 (single seat variant considering the pilot shortage). After all, neither of the two a/c is too costly.
Re. Bisons, iirc - there was talk of upgrading a couple of sqds worth of bis to the standard. The IAF still might do it considering the bis are still around. Dunno what kind of life can be squeezed out of them though - NAL did certify some 21s for another 1000 hrs i think.
I for myself have repeatedly failed to understand the rationale behind MRCA.
Welcome to the gang of "ymrcra". Esp. now when the IAF seems to support the MCA as well.
The sheer types of a/cs our AF operates is bind boggling. And we are hellbent on adding MRCA to that. I personally feel that instead of MRCA, more Su-35BMs should be urgently bought. It will have huge commonality with MKI and being a single seater, it will have advantage considering our pilot shortages.
Problem with the MKI/35 is that it is a little expensive to operate. Think of the fuel as well. I think the IAF sees a "medium" MRCA as a nice complement to both the LCA and Su-30 by being able to perform roles in both areas - at least to some extent. Eg. I can see a mig-29 or mirage2k doing point defense, not so with the MKI. Similarly, a M2k could do strike/self escort missions in TSP - but the LCA probly can't. So there may be a niche for the medium category.

CM
Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: LCA news and discussion

Post by Gaur »

Cain Marko wrote: Problem with the MKI/35 is that it is a little expensive to operate. Think of the fuel as well.
Yes, I have heard of the large expense of operating MKI. However, any 2 engine fighter is expensive to maintain. Is there any source to confirm if MKI is more expensive to operate than F-18SH and Mig-29?
And what about the fuel? I am unable to understand that. Are you suggesting that MKI guzzles much more fuel than its 2 engine counterparts? If so, could you also provide source for that?
Cain Marko wrote: I think the IAF sees a "medium" MRCA as a nice complement to both the LCA and Su-30 by being able to perform roles in both areas - at least to some extent. Eg. I can see a mig-29 or mirage2k doing point defense, not so with the MKI. Similarly, a M2k could do strike/self escort missions in TSP - but the LCA probly can't. So there may be a niche for the medium category.
Valid point. However, that holds true for nearly all fighters in MRCA. Can you see SH doing point defense?
On the other hand, Su-35 is an excellent air superiority fighter. If need arises there is no reason why it cannot perform point defense. Though I must admit that it would rather be wasting its capabilities.
Locked