LCA news and discussion

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Dec 2009 20:45

^^ Nope Sir. Not addressed to you.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 11 Dec 2009 20:57

Kanson wrote:^^ Nope Sir. Not addressed to you.

in that case please ignore the fact that I've provisionally addressed my last post to you.
my apologies.

but why sir ? please, plain rahul is fine.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 11 Dec 2009 20:58

pandyan wrote:
Rahul M wrote:I wish the lady toned down her excitement a bit !
rumor has it she asked for a ride in an LCA. ADA/DRDO refused and instead offered to give her a ride in arjun/ALH/and even a trainer version of Agni.

Probably drinking too much of coffee.

Err..do think about what you write.
How could she possibly get a ride in LCA?
LCA is a single seat a/c and she is not a qualified fighter pilot.
Unless of course, you are suggesting that she wanted a ride in the first flight of PV5.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 11 Dec 2009 22:25

pandyan wrote:even a trainer version of Agni.

I think Agni is a missile...so..what does the trainer version mean..!!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 11 Dec 2009 22:29

you people need a sarcasm 101 course.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 11 Dec 2009 22:34

hmmmmmmmm..............I apologize..

.!

pali · Post by **pali** » 11 Dec 2009 22:35

I don't understand why India needs a Heavy fighter like SU30MKI & Medium Fighter + a light fighter LCA. US plans to use multi-role JSF for almost all its needs and has capped production of Raptor. Britain is sticking with Typhoon, France with Rafael & Sweden with Gripen. Why do we need 3 different types of fighter? We could just have one multirole aircraft which will supplement all our basic needs. It's like a household having 3 cars, one for long-distance, other for medium and for lighter purposes ???? It's money down the drain.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 11 Dec 2009 22:37

Did not get that you were being sarcastic pandayan.
My apologies.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 11 Dec 2009 22:56

pali, strangely enough, air forces are not households and spur of the moment analogies can only go so far. far from being money down the drain, the path you suggest would simply be unaffordable, not to mention heavy fighters like the su-30mki bring capabilities that are unmatched by any other.
a fighter unfortunately isn't limited in its role to moving from point A to point B without breaking down, unlike family cars. and yes, many families do have more than one car, some for local commute and some for long range drives. some also have motorcycles on top of that.

it's somewhat naive to think that what works for the US or europe will automatically work for us. the french forces, AdlA and MN combined will induct a grand total of 180 rafales. perhaps any number exceeding that for IAF is a waste and money down the drain too ?

air forces decide on their force structure on a multitude of factors, threat perception, reliability, availability, cost of procurement, cost of operation and last but not the least capability of the aircraft.
it's extremely misleading to opine that a cursory glance at the force mix of one force can be identically applied to another without considering those factors in their entirety.
regards.

p.s. in case you wish to take this further I suggest we move on to the Indian Military Aviation thread.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 11 Dec 2009 23:40

Coming back to the LCA,just take a look at the entire project,the schedules and deadlines revised time and time again and we still haven't found an engine for it yet! So of what use will 40+ MK-1 LCAs be if the MK-2 is not perfected and built at lightning speed? If it arrives in the latter half of the next decade,do you seriously think that it will be a worthy acquisition in large numbers for the IAF when several far more capable aircraft would've arrived on the scene by then some in service with our enemies? Going by current estimates,the LCA MK-2,with an EJ engine most probably,will have to be redesigned for a larger fuselage,flight tested in full,a feat taking at least 3-4 years,with first production arriving around 2015,which at that time,the first 20-40 Mk-1s would've just come off the production line given the official 8-12 per year figure.The 5th-gen fighter from Russia,at least the Russian version,will be arriving off production lines at the same time! The JSF will be in service with a number of US allies and improved Chinese fighters will definitely be in the skies,perhaps even the prototypes of their 5th-gen fighter.

What one military mind says is that oto overcome the crisis of dwindling numbers and capability,the IAF should order another 100 SU-30MKIs in addition to the 240 on order,rammping up local production,as several MIG-21 squadrons will be retired next year leaving us with an acute shortage.The MMRCA deal will be made only by late next year and whatever aircraft is chosen,it will not be available in large numbers in service (200+) until the end of the decade

.[/quote]

Philip,

The problem that I see for the IAF is not one that is 10-15 years down the road. By 2015-2020, the force should be well on its way, past the cusp (or should it be valley) of the current darkness.Around 2014, we'll see the MRCA + LCA Mk2 production. Possibly even the Pakfa. The real problem lies from today till 2012. This three year period will see the IAF force structure at a measly 180 MKI + 120 Bisons + 110 M2k + MiG-29 + 160 odd Jags+floggers. All in all, about 600 frontline fighters or 29-32 sqds. That is a problem.

What the IAF needs is a quick acquisition of about 100 a/c the babus can't screw with, an a/c that can be regarded as part of the current inventory and possibly last for a couple of decades. The story about 50 extra MKIs sounds like a good idea. A few more Jags and possibly malaysian fulcrums + qatari mirages would do the trick.

As far as the LCA goes; as the "low" part of the IAF's hi-lo mix; it'll more than do the trick, even in the Mk1 avatar (at least till 2020). The critical need here is NOT quick production or induction but ensuring that the design is superb and sound; ahead of all 4 gen birds including the m2k, solah and the fulcrum (which I believe it will be) in all important flight regimes ITRs, STRs, acceleration etc etc. This will ensure that the IAF gets an airframe in its mix (that too at the low end), which is inherently equal to the top birds in western europe (Rafale, Tiffy, Gripen). Something that can comfortably be the backbone of the force for the next 3 decades.
JMT.

CM

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Dec 2009 02:31

Rahul M wrote:I wish the lady toned down her excitement a bit !

have you read her articles ? its more bombast than anything else. giving free rides to "defence journos" like her is such a total waste as far as the knowledge gained from it that is disseminated among aam junta is concerned..she's pretty much a lay person with little to no real defence technology understanding or background. I appreciate the fact that we get some news and some great pics from the likes of her, but I wouldn't give much credence to her opinion on any technical issue or discussion.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Dec 2009 02:39

pandyan wrote:rumor has it she asked for a ride in an LCA. ADA/DRDO refused and instead offered to give her a ride in arjun/ALH/and even a trainer version of Agni.

Probably drinking too much of coffee.

I had suggested to Shiv Aroor on his blog that maybe when the LCA twin seater has gone through enough flights, he could take a flight on board it, so maybe he'd write something good about it for once.

I did that after reading and watching his gushing "analysis" of the Gripen C that he flew in. I can bet that had he done the same on board a MiG-21 Mongol blindfolded, the guy wouldn't know what was different. yeah the cockpits are different and its got zing-zang HUD and MFDs and datalink and what not, but much of it would be greek and latin for the un-trained eye. and so his documentary was about as informative as it would be if I was given a ride in a Ferrari Scuderia doing 200 mph. I'd pretty much be so thrilled with the idea of a ride that it would make me write wonderful stuff on the Ferrari. only a guy like the Top Gear hosts who drive it and are very knowledgeable about the car can tell what its performance is really like and how good it is compared to other super cars. which is why reading the test flight analysis by Pete Collins (for Rafale) and Chris Yeovil (for Gripen) is so wonderful ! those guys know their stuff !

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 12 Dec 2009 02:49

Philip wrote:If it arrives in the latter half of the next decade,do you seriously think that it will be a worthy acquisition in large numbers for the IAF when several far more capable aircraft would've arrived on the scene by then some in service with our enemies? The MMRCA deal will be made only by late next year and whatever aircraft is chosen,it will not be available in large numbers in service (200+) until the end of the decade.

I am confused...you have been passionately championing Mig 35...now I think you are saying just scrap MRCA. It is not without reason that even USA with its vast military budget went for a mix of light (F-16) and heavy (F-15) fighter for economic reasons.

Philip wrote:What one military mind says is that oto overcome the crisis of dwindling numbers and capability,the IAF should order another 100 SU-30MKIs in addition to the 240 on order,rammping up local production,as several MIG-21 squadrons will be retired next year leaving us with an acute shortage.

I support ordering another 100 Su 30MKI but not in place of LCA.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Dec 2009 06:58

pali wrote: Why do we need 3 different types of fighter?

Because Manoj Joshi says so. So there!!

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 12 Dec 2009 07:13

If India does provide part of the funding and R&D then flight demonstration could well take place on a prototype of Mk-2.

only if we select EJ200 to power Tejas MK-II ,i think TVC will be more to EF then Tejas ,i am not a guru but i don't think a Small Single engined Aircraft like Tejas will have any great benefits if added with TVC and it will only increase its weight it might be great for a Naval LCA

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 12 Dec 2009 08:34

Broadsword: Kaveri Engine comes alive; will power Indian fighters!

by Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 12th Dec 09

In what was nominated in 1976 as the Fight of the Year, boxing legend, George Foreman, staggered to his feet after being twice knocked down by Ron Lyle, to flatten Lyle with a stunning knockout punch. If the Ministry of Defence has its way, India’s Kaveri engine, bitterly criticised as underpowered even after two decades of development, could recover to do a Foreman on its two world-class rivals.

Meant to power the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the Kaveri was heading for a quiet burial after completing flight tests that are underway in Russia. In its place, two alternatives were short-listed: the Eurojet EJ200, and the General Electric F-414 engines. A final choice was expected within weeks.

But, unexpectedly, the Kaveri has gotten off the floor. Business Standard has learned that the MoD --- apprehending that Eurojet and GE would hang back from providing India with critical engine technologies, even if Transfer of Technology (ToT) was mandated in a purchase contract --- now wants to co-develop an engine in India rather than manufacturing one under licence. The DRDO’s Gas Turbine and Research Establishment (GTRE), which has a design partnership with French engine-maker, Snecma, has been asked to design a more powerful Kaveri successor.

A Snecma-GTRE joint venture to develop the upgraded Kaveri is likely to be announced during President Nikolas Sarkozy’s visit to India in early 2010.

Minister of State for Defence, Dr Pallam Raju, has confirmed to Business Standard, “It is important for India to have indigenous capabilities in engine design. And having invested so many man-hours of work into the design of the Kaveri engine, it would be a national waste to fritter away or dilute those capabilities…. (Snecma) is willing to co-develop an engine with us; they are willing to go beyond just transfer of technology. It is a value-added offer that gives us better technology than what we would get from ToT from Eurojet or GE.”

Amongst the key engine technologies that India needs is that for Single Crystal Blades, which significantly enhance turbine performance within the incandescent confines of a jet engine combustion chamber. The MoD suspects that this technology, worth billions of dollars, will not be fully transferred by Eurojet or by GE.

An MoD official, who is closely involved in deciding between the EJ200 and the F-414, explains this apprehension: “The tender stipulates that 50% of the technology must be transferred to India. But the vendor will lump together a bunch of low-end technologies that might add up to 50%. What we want is one or two high-end technologies.”

GTRE designers say that it would take about 4 years to co-develop an engine with Snecma, somewhat longer than the 3-year time frame in which the EJ200 or F-414 would start being delivered. Based upon the performance of the Kaveri flight in the ongoing flight tests in Russia, GTRE sources are confident that, “Snecma-GTRE is fully capable of producing an engine as good as the F-414 and the EJ-200.”

That will involve improving from the current Kaveri’s maximum thrust of 65 Kilo Newtons (KN), to the 95 KN that the EJ200 and F-414 develop.

While Snecma remains tight-lipped, it is aware of the challenges in such a project. Business Standard has learned that Snecma had conducted a Technical Audit of the Kaveri programme in 1998, identifying design challenges that included developing materials that could withstand the combustion chamber temperatures of around 2000 degrees centigrade.

While the MoD is trusting Snecma to help GTRE in overcoming these challenges, it is also aware of the Kaveri’s unenviable record of time and cost overruns. The MoD is still considering whether to put all its eggs in the GTRE-Snecma basket or to go ahead on a parallel track, choosing either the EJ200, or the GE F-414, as insurance against further delays.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 12 Dec 2009 09:42

Rubbish article. IF Eurojet and GE can't give ToT why would snecma do the same? I hoped the useless GTRE had managed some breakthrough in single crystal tech.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Dec 2009 09:48

'uselss' GTRE does not work on SC tech nor are they qualified to do so.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 12 Dec 2009 09:53

Rahul M wrote:'uselss' GTRE does not work on SC tech nor are they qualified to do so.

Ok whichever is the useless PSU involved in that.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 12 Dec 2009 10:05

Dmurphy wrote: GTRE designers say that it would take about 4 years to co-develop an engine with Snecma, somewhat longer than the 3-year time frame in which the EJ200 or F-414 would start being delivered. Based upon the performance of the Kaveri flight in the ongoing flight tests in Russia, GTRE sources are confident that, “Snecma-GTRE is fully capable of producing an engine as good as the F-414 and the EJ-200.”

Isn't it another early sign of delays for LCA production....??

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Dec 2009 10:16

vavinash wrote:
Rahul M wrote:'uselss' GTRE does not work on SC tech nor are they qualified to do so.

Ok whichever is the useless PSU involved in that.

neither GTRE nor the 'useless' organization involved is a 'PSU'.
I can understand DDM failing to understand the difference between a PSU and a R&D establishment but coming from a BRFite it's quite another matter.

Isn't it another early sign of delays for LCA production....??

not quite. that is if they can stick to the 4 year deadline. initial stages of the Mk2 test program can be conducted with the GE F-404.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Dec 2009 10:19

hi rahul, no issues. unlike aroor who went on dictating terms in technical stuff, she is quite girlie in her topic(not in any offensive tone) So emjoyable to read than high octane gibberish from people like joshi.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 12 Dec 2009 11:11

pandyan wrote:Also, why would EJ/GE take 3 years to give an engine in production? Are they expecting major changes (I know AS highlighted some minor modifications in his previous blog...)

AFAIK, GE-414 and EJ-200 are already finished goods which were not primarily designed for Tejas. Which means they will have to integrate the engine with the Tejas airframe and everything that comes with it - wind tunnel testing(?), aerodynamics etc.

In Snecma-GTRE's case, they will be designing the engine for the Tejas right from the outset.

And yeah, legit concerns those by vavinash - why would Snecma pass one something to GTRE that GE or EJ won't?

Rahul M wrote:'uselss' GTRE does not work on SC tech nor are they qualified to do so.

RM, noob question: If one needs to be qualified to design an engine, why did the 'unqualified' GTRE embark upon the Kaveri project anyway?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 Dec 2009 11:17

Why exactly does a Tejas need TVC? IIRC, the russians found it useful mainly for birds that have high wingloading such as the berkut and MKI, and perhaps the MiG-35 (considering how much higher its MTOW is). It seems that's when TVC really helps. What would TVC do for light weights such as the Tejas? Could anyone explain?

CM.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 12 Dec 2009 11:24

Rahul M wrote: not quite. that is if they can stick to the 4 year deadline. initial stages of the Mk2 test program can be conducted with the GE F-404.

How exactly? The whole point of having a MkII version is the new engine. Aside from that the only major difference would (possibly) be an AESA radar. But the LCA needs a new engine a lot more desperately than an AESA radar (which when we develop one can be tested even on the Mk1 LCA). The Mk2 test program would obviously revolve around testing the LCA with the new engine and structural modifications. So what exactly are they going to test with the GE F-404? Unless an LCA has the uprated engine (either the reborn kaveri or the firangi engines) you cannot even call it an LCA Mk2.

IMHO it would be naive to assume that this new decision won't cause another ill-affordable delay in the induction of the LCA in large numbers. I don't think the IAF will go beyond the current 20+20 numbers for the Mk1. And I hope another delay doesn't force them to do that because it could turn out to be a disaster in the long term.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Dec 2009 11:35

RM, noob question: If one needs to be qualified to design an engine, why did the 'unqualified' GTRE embark upon the Kaveri project anyway?

unqualified to develop SC blades which is material science, not engine design.
SC blades is the responsibility of labs like DMRL, not that of GTRE.
frankly I didn't understand your question.

================
CM, may be they have something like the F-16 vista in mind ?
================

nachiket, Mk2 will have differences in aerodynamic lay out as well for which control laws will have to be modified. testing that does not necessarily call for more powerful engines from day one if differences in weight and CG can be accounted for (which can be done)
testing will not call for pushing the flight envelope to its limit from day 1.

that said, IFF kaveri-2 is ready in 4 years it will be on time for Mk2 roll-out, which is supposed to take place in 2014.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 12 Dec 2009 11:45

Tejas engine offset offers come in
http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report_te ... in_1322774

Apparently, Eurojet, which will be supplying its EJ200 for the new LCA Tejas, has got clearance from Nato Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency (Netma) for the transfer of "key technology" under the offset programme.

"In their proposal, they (Eurojet) have accepted to transfer key technology. They have also mentioned in the same note they can discuss transfer of other technologies too," the source said.

According to him, if the European engine maker offers 100% transfer of technology, the price of its bid would shoot up; "Then its bid would not be competitive."Eurojet has said it would form a joint venture with Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd or some private company to fulfill its offset obligation.

GE, which will supply the F-414 engine, is also said to have acquired the approval of the US government for technology transfer for the LCA programme. The two companies that have bid for the $750 million order for 99 engines for Tejas.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 12 Dec 2009 12:15

Rahul M wrote:SC blades is the responsibility of labs like DMRL, not that of GTRE.

For a moment i mistook the SC blades to be the purview of GTRE. But then DMRL seems to have failed miserably then.

Rahul M wrote:that said, IFF kaveri-2 is ready in 4 years it will be on time for Mk2 roll-out, which is supposed to take place in 2014

RM, if Kaveri is just gonna be 'ready' in four years time, what about all the time that will go into testing it with the airframe and fine tuning it? Won't starting off with the same process with the already developed GE-414 or EJ-200 take lesser time for Tejas Mk2 to roll out?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Dec 2009 12:36

if Kaveri is just gonna be 'ready' in four years time, what about all the time that will go into testing it with the airframe and fine tuning it?

if the engine is indeed ready (all test runs completed, thrust targets achieved, reliability checked in accelerated test run etc) then the tests you mention form part of the aircraft testing itself.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Dec 2009 12:53

IMO, its best for the Tejas as well as the IAF to delink the Kaveri from the Tejas Mk2 program now. GTRE and other organisations have made a lot of claims that they've not been able to back up and that is the unfortunate truth. I was going through Flight Global archives and found articles dating back to 1999 where GTRE guys said that Kaveri will be ready in a couple of years. 10 years down the line its still not ready. I mean I can understand that there are technology problems, but what kind of project management is it to be so blissfully unaware of them till the last minute and make claims about the product being ready and then dragging on for another decade ?

Ajai Shukla again claims its max. thrust in AB is 65 kN, which is way below design intent of 80kN. Its best to go for the F414, which will bring down the cost of the Tejas Mk.2 by at least $4-5 million (going by publicly available data on their unit prices) and collaborate with Snecma to get another Kaveri variant ready for the MCA .

the Tejas Mk1 will anyway be flying with F-404 IN20s so we'll already see 2 squadrons with the American engine so the MoD, IAF and other powers obviously feel that its ok to have an American engine..and 3 out of the 6 MRCA competitors also use GE engines, so there is a strong likelihood that we'll end up with a GE engine for the MRCA as well.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 Dec 2009 13:20

Rahul,

IIRC, the russkis point out that only aircraft with high wingloading (greater than 400kgmsq) and thrust can really find TVC useful @ high AOA below Mach 0.5. Hence they mainly advertise it for the massively loaded advanced flanker/fulcrum variants. It seems, at higher speeds (mach 0.5+), it is not of much use for combat. Now, the Tejas has an incredibly low wingloading, moreover its thrust is not super high. Still, I s'pose the naval variant might have higher loading and require decent slow speed control and thats where the TVC might help. JM two pennies.

CM.

vipins · Post by **vipins** » 12 Dec 2009 14:04

I thought the plan was -

2 mk1 squadron - F-404 - till 2011
next 4(or 6??)mk1 sq - F414 or EJ200 - 2011-2014
mk2 - modified Kaveri(GTRE + Snecma) - 2014+

Then why this change in plan,it could lead to further delays.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 Dec 2009 14:21

vipins wrote:I thought the plan was -

2 mk1 squadron - F-404 - till 2011
next 4(or 6??)mk1 sq - F414 or EJ200 - 2011-2014
mk2 - modified Kaveri(GTRE + Snecma) - 2014+

Then why this change in plan,it could lead to further delays.

You seem to be in a bit of a hurry. Hold on, the LCA doesn't fly that fast, not if the powers that be can help it. From the latest reports:
Till 2011 - 4 LCA Mk1 (GE - F404 IN20)
2012 - 8 LCA Mk1
2013 - 8 LCA mk1
2014 - 8-12 LCA mk1
2015 - 8-12 LCA mk1

2014-15 - LCA mkII with EJ200/F414 production begins, continues till 2020-25 for 99 a/c. Totally - 140 LCA look for certain*

CM

* Certain only under given conditions - they could always botch it up if the EJ-200/414 deal is scrapped in favor of the reincarnated Kaveri. LCA could then have a smalll test run of 40 a/c + 8 LSPs and make way for the MCA powered by said reincarnated Kaveri circa 2025. Until then of course, phoren goodies worth Billions will casually sneak into IAF inventory, perhaps even 190 MRCA, 190 Pakfa, 280 MKI etc etc.

vipins · Post by **vipins** » 12 Dec 2009 14:30

Cain Marko wrote: You seem to be in a bit of a hurry. Hold on, the LCA doesn't fly that fast, not if the powers that be can help it. From the latest reports:
Till 2011 - 4 LCA Mk1 (GE - F404 IN20)
2012 - 8 LCA Mk1
2013 - 8 LCA mk1
2014 - 8-12 LCA mk1
2015 - 8-12 LCA mk1

2014-15 - LCA mkII with EJ200/F414 production begins, continues till 2020-25 for 99 a/c. Totally - 140 LCA look for certain*

CM

* Certain only under given conditions - they could always botch it up if the EJ-200/414 deal is scrapped in favor of the reincarnated Kaveri. LCA could then have a smalll test run of 40 a/c + 8 LSPs and make way for the MCA powered by said reincarnated Kaveri circa 2025. Until then of course, phoren goodies worth Billions will casually sneak into IAF inventory, perhaps even 190 MRCA, 190 Pakfa, 280 MKI etc etc.

Thanx for clarification.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 12 Dec 2009 15:02

Just got my copy of vayu Aerospace , according to it four Tejas aircraft's will be visiting Goa to carry out Sea trials and for remaining points ,that includes PV-1/2/3 and LSP-2, so four aircraft's were in goa for currently done sea trials . PV-3 and LSP-2 carried out weapon trials at jamnagar with various stores configurations as well as air to ground trials on various modes of weapons delivery

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Dec 2009 15:58

I recently ran into my friend,the former celebrated AM who gave ( me posted some time ago) the entire inside story of how badly the LCA project was managed and the chief culprits.His assertion that the "entire project proceeds as fast as the main component,the engine",remains true to this day.After years of talk about Kaveri,which allegedly failed time and time again when tested in Russia,then was given a quiet unceremonious burial,it has like an historical figure from Palestine 2000+ years ago,been resurrected,not surprisingly too ,only when a foreign alternative was around the corner! Frankly,if we are to believe the GTRE,then even the gains made so far in the LCA project will be totally lost.I've given his views on the MMRCA contest in that thread.

It is abundantly clear that the desi boffins,want to scuttle acquisition of foreign wares whenever possible and protect their turf with work even if it takes ages to arrive,and even if they cannot make the grade.One can understand if a rigorously tested alternative is available indigenously,as with some weapon systems and missiles .Therefore,we must proceed with maximum speed in choosing the alternative engine for the MK-2 version and modifying the aircraft to accomodate it ands then etst it ,which if not perfected within a reasonable time,will see the aircraft lose its relevance as I've said a decade hence.

The rate of production is the key factor too,as such a slow rate as mentioned cannot from the figures given make the aircraft the mainstay of the IAF.That role appears to be heading firmly in the SU-30MKI's direction,where indigenous production will be ramped up and extras acquired direct from Russia.WE will in the future ,from available info and trends,have at least 300 of the same,making the aircraft the IAF's solid core of its capabilities.

I'm glad that some have seen the light of day that the entire force structure of the IAF should be looked at ,current inventory,obsolescence of large numbers shortly,stop-gap acquisitions and medium and long term strength and capabilities required keeping in mind the rapid technogical developments in the aerospace industry.Ideally,as I've said before "more of the same" would be the best way to go for easy induction to keep numbers happy,and had the French had the Mirage production still available,I guess that the IAF would've bought upgraded M-2000s.With the Mirage unavailable and the cost of upgrades semingly excessive,the next best bet to me would be the MIG-35 (engines for UG-29s already being made here) which is an avatar of the MIG-29 in service, being upgraded and the easiest of the lot to absorb,possibly the cheapest too.There is however one big Q mark about immediate MIG-35 production right now,mentioned earlier,which is why some analysts prefer extra SU-30MKIs being produced in full flow in Russia right now,as the fastest way to augment the IAF's dwindling numbers.

(As for the statement about the ALH,I was quoting a senior naval officer,as the ALH was touted as being the all rounder that would fulfill all tasks of a naval helo,including ASW warfare.He said that while the helo was found acceptable by the other two services,the naval requirements being far more sophisticated would require an import.In fact,the IN would probably require two different types,one for use aboard the frigates and destroyers,Sea King replacements,possibly the NH-90 and larger ones for the carrier ASW,with the ALH performing utility/commns duties.)

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Dec 2009 17:55

Philip wrote:I recently ran into my friend,the former celebrated AM who gave ( me posted some time ago) the entire inside story of how badly the LCA project was managed and the chief culprits.)

Philip-avargal - I believe there is another side to this story that I have heard from another celebrated air marshal...

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 12 Dec 2009 19:11

Ha ha ha one AMs words against anothers. Just like the Arjun

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 12 Dec 2009 20:08

yawnn all these celebrated Air marshals

What they did they do when they were in the chair?

Why did they not scream bloody murder then?? worried about their pensions???

like Barbora - they could have made a public announcement if they felt things were that badly off.

all now smugly want to describe the problems when they are outside. its worthless now.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 12 Dec 2009 21:45

I think that Ajai Shukla has been greatly influenced by BRFites and is writing with us as a target audience/critics. If the Kaveri has been unable to achieve the initially set target after 2 decades then it should be scrapped. Nothing will come out of a failed effort that is going nowhere. Pouring good money after bad will lead to further losses and harm national interests and security. We need to cut our losses and move on. Shit happens. GTRE should be basically disbanded. The core team should be assimilated in a new effort with the top brains in the country in engine manufacture.

Engine development should be taken out of the LCA program. IAF/DRDO need to get on the same page ASAP and finalize the engine for MK2 in a month and not years after all WTF is taking so long to decide? If TOT for the selected engine is not available then buy enough numbers to keep the LCA flying for 2 decades.

Think like the Chinese. Take 10 engines (bought for MK2) apart and copy/reverse engineer their design. Develop an engine from what is learnt from the Kaveri and the reverse engineering. If all this is going to take longer than 3-4 years then we may as well give up. If Indians do not have the capability to put in long hours in such an effort then scrap the entire engine and LCA program and order extra MKI. The LCA and the Kaveri program cannot stay hanging for several generations.

LCA MK-1 should be manufactured at the rate of 50 per year and not 8. That is if national security is important. If chai-biscoot prevails in all walks of life then we may as well give up and start to learn Mandarin.