LCA News and Discussions

[shiv]

yes i have few close people who have worked in hal then quit due to the people who handled them one is my brother who was into an important project and lost all hope and left and joined Rockwell

Your brother was not the only one. Many others have had similar experiences. But that does not mean that other people do not have more positive stories to tell. On this forum you will find hundreds of people with varied opinions and experiences and it does not do to vent your personal/family frustrations on here. Someone is sure to call you out.

[SaiK]

and you may never know how many people post here from the place your brother works. it is best kept confidential.

[rajanb]

yes i have few close people who have worked in hal then quit due to the people who handled them one is my brother who was into an important project and lost all hope and left and joined Rockwell

Your brother was not the only one. Many others have had similar experiences. But that does not mean that other people do not have more positive stories to tell. On this forum you will find hundreds of people with varied opinions and experiences and it does not do to vent your personal/family frustrations on here. Someone is sure to call you out.

Having a working experience spanning 42 years, with close interactions with PSUs and private companies, I have also seen the most negative treatment of employees in famous, well know Indian companies. This malaise, if we can call it that, is due to human nature. A PSU or a Private tag has no relevance!

The only difference is, at senior macro levels in private companies, there is accountability to the share holders, which makes for better strategies, quality and finish of products in a timely manner. And at times, a profit margin which enters the realm of greed.

[member_24574]

and you may never know how many people post here from the place your brother works. it is best kept confidential.

point taken ...

[member_24574]

Your brother was not the only one. Many others have had similar experiences. But that does not mean that other people do not have more positive stories to tell. On this forum you will find hundreds of people with varied opinions and experiences and it does not do to vent your personal/family frustrations on here. Someone is sure to call you out.[/quote]

Having a working experience spanning 42 years, with close interactions with PSUs and private companies, I have also seen the most negative treatment of employees in famous, well know Indian companies. This malaise, if we can call it that, is due to human nature. A PSU or a Private tag has no relevance!

The only difference is, at senior macro levels in private companies, there is accountability to the share holders, which makes for better strategies, quality and finish of products in a timely manner. And at times, a profit margin which enters the realm of greed.[/quote]

sir my only cry is we have made or good people have set up nice right organizations across India as PSU's few decades back but, thing is we have failed to nurture the right people lead them, I work in imaging domain with sensor manufacturer
and i find the effort goes in to get right people and right leaders, yes i agree few were not ideal fits, HAL, DRDO, DRL CABS ISRO are our jewels where our scientific future of our nations lies there is a change needed to lead people , look at rasberry pie device why can not NAL,ADA and other PSU come up come thing similar for students and other to get into scientific thinking which in need of the hour

[member_20292]

^^^
Podila. Any relation to the gopal podila Professor, who was shot in Alabama some time back? If so, my commiserations.

[SagarAg]

Flight test update

From

LCA-Tejas has completed 2025 Test Flights Successfully. (10-Feb-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-350,LSP1-74,LSP2-250,PV5-36,LSP3-99,LSP4-65,LSP5-127,LSP7-18,NP1-4)

to

LCA-Tejas has completed 2029 Test Flights Successfully. (12-Feb-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-350,LSP1-74,LSP2-250,PV5-36,LSP3-100,LSP4-65,LSP5-128,LSP7-20,NP1-4)

[rajanb]

Your brother was not the only one. Many others have had similar experiences. But that does not mean that other people do not have more positive stories to tell. On this forum you will find hundreds of people with varied opinions and experiences and it does not do to vent your personal/family frustrations on here. Someone is sure to call you out.

Having a working experience spanning 42 years, with close interactions with PSUs and private companies, I have also seen the most negative treatment of employees in famous, well know Indian companies. This malaise, if we can call it that, is due to human nature. A PSU or a Private tag has no relevance!

The only difference is, at senior macro levels in private companies, there is accountability to the share holders, which makes for better strategies, quality and finish of products in a timely manner. And at times, a profit margin which enters the realm of greed

sir my only cry is we have made or good people have set up nice right organizations across India as PSU's few decades back but, thing is we have failed to nurture the right people lead them, I work in imaging domain with sensor manufacturer
and i find the effort goes in to get right people and right leaders, yes i agree few were not ideal fits, HAL, DRDO, DRL CABS ISRO are our jewels where our scientific future of our nations lies there is a change needed to lead people , look at rasberry pie device why can not NAL,ADA and other PSU come up come thing similar for students and other to get into scientific thinking which in need of the hour.

Unfortunately, I have seen PSU's with very good ethics, going slowly down the drain. I blame it on the babudom and political class.
My favourite example is Air India. Are you aware, that in 1967, it was adjudged the second best International Carrier in the technical category? The Chairman, my all time management hero, The one and only JRD Tata.

On the LCA front, there are slackers working. However, at the same time, there are brilliant, dedicated, dedicated, hard working people working!

I feel sad to see generalistaions being made. That HAL/ADA are useless. It does two things. It can be demotivating for the good ones, which is bad for us. It can bring happiness to paki and chinese lurkers here, which actually is a good thing, in a way. Let them underestimate us! Generalisations in my POV, are irreverent and irrelevant.

Going back to the topic of the LCA. What has given me belief has been what I have seen it doing outside of limited Gs aeroshows. And the fact that whoever has flown it has praised it. And they are all fighting men with experience of flying other mean machines.

At the end of the day, it is all about capability. And that can come about if pilot and machine become as one.

I would never win an F1 if I raced in a McLaren! Because I and the machine would never be as one! Especially in my ancient age! Having seen a Tigermoth and Harvard airshow in my first decade!

[member_24574]

^^^
Podila. Any relation to the gopal podila Professor, who was shot in Alabama some time back? If so, my commiserations.

Yes he was dad's younger brother ..

[abhishek-nayak]

I feel sad to see generalistaions being made. That HAL/ADA are useless. It does two things. It can be demotivating for the good ones, which is bad for us. It can bring happiness to paki and chinese lurkers here, which actually is a good thing, in a way. Let them underestimate us! Generalisations in my POV, are irreverent and irrelevant.

I wonder how is HAL handling 100's of projects at the same time...

Going back to the topic of the LCA. What has given me belief has been what I have seen it doing outside of limited Gs aeroshows. And the fact that whoever has flown it has praised it. And they are all fighting men with experience of flying other mean machines.

Nobody is questioning about the quality but the timing....FOC in 2015 for MK1....thats just too late......

[member_23455]

..And they are all fighting men with experience of flying other mean machines.

At the end of the day, it is all about capability. And that can come about if pilot and machine become as one.

I would never win an F1 if I raced in a McLaren! Because I and the machine would never be as one! Especially in my ancient age! Having seen a Tigermoth and Harvard airshow in my first decade!

And successive IAF chiefs aren't?

And as stated above if at the end of the day it is all about capability why the heartburn when the IAF chooses to put that as the no. 1 consideration above the nationality of the vendor. You can't have it both ways.

[Sancho]

I think that the IN itself has no plans as yet for an AMCA based naval fighter, but that doesn’t imply AT ALL that the AMCA is being developed without taking IAF requirements into account. They are the ones driving the AMCA’s design with their requirements for full stealth and what not.

When you have read the comments of Air Chief Brown on AMCA, it gets clear that they don't. There is no requirement formulated from IAF so far, they just wait and see what ADA/DRDO might come up with and then decided if it's worth it to invest in it, or to stick with (more) FGFA. On the other side we have IN officials stating interest in AMCA even some years ago, but so far AMCA is only developed by the requirements of the industry.

and designing an Air Force fighter FIRST and then maybe in the future a naval variant will be developed.

Which IN officials stated as well, is a huge mistake, especially if the force that needs a stealth fighter the most, is IN because IAF already will have one.

Cmde Mao was clear that the issue with the N-LCA doesn’t apply to the AMCA since it’s a twin engine fighter with a central keel to pass loads to. So he said that if required, it can be done, no issues.

If I got you right, his points were aimed at the re-designed gears, but navalising a fighter especially for catapult take off is way more demanding and difficult than navalising it for ski-jump take off. That's why the EF consortium don't offer a CATOBAR version of the EF at all, because it would require too many structural changes, for which the EF was never developed for.
When you then add the difficulties of re-designing a stealth design for the use on a carrier, it is a no brainer that navalising an AMCA from an air force version will be very difficult and most likely ADA/DRDO underestimate the needed changes again, just like they did with N-LCA.

Why the hostility towards DRDO? This really isn’t the most important feature of the Mk2 at all! Even the request to CSIO to develop a frameless HUD is a nice to have feature, not a must have feature.

Because they are responsible for most of the core delays of LCA and all these unnecessary but nice to have features and side developments for IN, only delay the project as a whole.

Indeed, the LCA’s radome dia of 650mm comfortably exceeds that of the SHar FRS.51s that we have. I myself was extremely surprised to hear that the detection range won’t be a lot greater on the N-LCA. But like I said in my original post, this particular part of our discussion wasn’t very clear..he seemed to imply that the SAME radar on the LUSH SHar was to be used on N-LCA. No mention of AESA. I’ll try to get this clarified. From what I understood, the IAF Mk1 is going ahead with Elta 2032/MMR but didn’t get to discuss about the Mk2 for the IAF and what radar it’ll get.

Would be interesting to know, also what the status of DRDOs puls doppler MMR is, because if MK1 will use EL 2032 and ADA officials even say, that it needs to be seen if MK2 will have an AESA or not, it hints on problems with DRDOs radars and as expected very premature stages in AESA developments. Insisting on an indigenous AESA, would make LCA less capable and might cause further delays again, the same mistakes DRDO made earlier.

[Lalmohan]

perhaps MOD and each service needs to specifically train a strategic engineering development leadership cadre? maybe make it a mixed services, civilian, body with relevant training (post grad level) with private sector partnership - they might even be housed in a separate organisation with posts taken on rotation basis and return to their parent organisations afterwards

[Sancho]

2 cents about fuel requirements of Naval LCA as take off is fuel intensive. May be detachable drop tanks (one/more) be designed to accommodate that much fuel, and attached in a manner that moves Center of Gravity (well not too much just as much as little fuel and detachable fuel tanks can) to aid in takeoff on carrier. It is an issue, not a problem. It can aid other naval aircrafts as well ( & more may be) in case something like this, or better, works out. After take off its purpose is served so dropping the same should make the aircraft fly normally. The fuel for take off could be used for take off too & the fuel from detachable tanks can added to main fuel tank after take off as convenient. If cost is a factor it could be all plastic/wood (floats on water) and reusable.

The main problem is, that a lack of internal fuel capacity, requires to carry more fuel tanks. That again means less hardpoints for weapons.
Even if N-LCA would be refuelled after take off of a Mig 29K, to offer sufficient endurance in CAP it needs additional external fuel capacities too and the minute the wing fuel tanks are needed, the limited the performance of N-LCA will be, especially compared to the Migs.
Saab was able to integrate nearly 40% more internal fuel, with similar changes (new internal fuel tank, re-positioned gear bays to add space for more fuel), that's why not having similar advantages would be more than disappointing. I also don't understand why the naval MK2 version should have re-positioned gears, but the air force version won't?

[SaiK]

perhaps MOD and each service needs to specifically train a strategic engineering development leadership cadre? maybe make it a mixed services, civilian, body with relevant training (post grad level) with private sector partnership - they might even be housed in a separate organisation with posts taken on rotation basis and return to their parent organisations afterwards

where is my quota?

[vishvak]

Sancho ji, Sorry didn't specify that it was not about using hardpoints. It is just a 2 cent suggestion - a detachable fuel tank independent of the whole jet (eg. additional fit between landing gear) that once dropped - immediately after take-off - would not at all increase radar signature as it would be dropped. All this just to add fuel just sufficient for take-off in naval LCA. A better design may aid in take-off itself with change in CG as an improvements amongst others like plastic/wood-floating material for re-usability etc.

[Kartik]

Fair point, but time will tell whether the lessons from the N-LCA prorgram come in handy when designing a naval variant of the AMCA or not. But what was clear is that the choice was made by the IN, and not ADA. If there is someone you wish to blame for that choice, its the IN's top brass.

Because they are responsible for most of the core delays of LCA and all these unnecessary but nice to have features and side developments for IN, only delay the project as a whole.

no they aren't wholly responsible for the core delays. There is a set of circumstances that have conspired to cause this, along with lack of experience, lack of certain knowledge/skillsets, sanctions, poor program management and very poor oversight from the IAF right upto 2006.. Don't paint it all as being black- there are shades of gray to every story. and the unnecessary but nice to have feature won't hold back the IAF's or IN's Mk2 variants- they will be developed and then when they're ready, will be offered to them. It is in no way going to delay either program.

Would be interesting to know, also what the status of DRDOs puls doppler MMR is, because if MK1 will use EL 2032 and ADA officials even say, that it needs to be seen if MK2 will have an AESA or not, it hints on problems with DRDOs radars and as expected very premature stages in AESA developments. Insisting on an indigenous AESA, would make LCA less capable and might cause further delays again, the same mistakes DRDO made earlier.

Who is insisting on an indigenous AESA? Certainly not the ADA or LRDE. Last I remember, it was ACM PV Naik who was insisting on that like the success of the entire Mk2 program depended on it, even while being more than happy to import an entire Rafale in large numbers. The logic of that is beyond me, but then 'Customer is King', isn't he?

[Anujan]

OT but relevant to those obsessing about problems and losing sight of iterative development and expecting a perfect product from get go.

Here is massa's multibillion dollar program built on decades of experience.

http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog ... -the-f-35/
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... et-382078/

[SaiK]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_vOp ... rences.jpg
not sure if merlin can provide us a better resolution. I notice they have either packaged the redundancy on the same mission and display computer or removed it.?

[rajanb]

And successive IAF chiefs aren't?

And as stated above if at the end of the day it is all about capability why the heartburn when the IAF chooses to put that as the no. 1 consideration above the nationality of the vendor. You can't have it both ways.

Look at the bigger picture. The various threads relating to associated subjects in other threads. And you will get the answer.

[Indranil]

When you have read the comments of Air Chief Brown on AMCA, it gets clear that they don't. There is no requirement formulated from IAF so far, they just wait and see what ADA/DRDO might come up with and then decided if it's worth it to invest in it, or to stick with (more) FGFA. On the other side we have IN officials stating interest in AMCA even some years ago, but so far AMCA is only developed by the requirements of the industry.

I don't remember ACM Brown say anything about the requirement of AMCA. It was ex-ACM Fali Major who said he does not see the requirement of AMCA. My opinion is that Air headquarters has nothing against indigenous projects, but they don't have faith on DPSUs to deliver.

[ramana]

Indranil, What do they have in mind for the 1200kg hardpoints on the LCA?

[ManuJ]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_vOp ... rences.jpg
not sure if merlin can provide us a better resolution. I notice they have either packaged the redundancy on the same mission and display computer or removed it.?

Thanks merlin and SaiK. We need a bigger picture!

[Indranil]

Indranil, What do they have in mind for the 1200kg hardpoints on the LCA?

I did not understand your question. You mean when those hardpoints are not being used for drop tanks?

For the Naval variants they can be used to carry KH-31/KH-35/KH59 missiles. For the AF version, it can definitely carry 1 LGB. It would be very interesting to see if it has space for a rack of 2 LGBs. I have not seen it yet, but I am assuming that it can hold two 450 kg unguided bombs in an inline fashion.

[SagarAg]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_vOp ... rences.jpg
not sure if merlin can provide us a better resolution. I notice they have either packaged the redundancy on the same mission and display computer or removed it.?

Thanks merlin and SaiK. We need a bigger picture!

Key Features:
MK-I:
1. Glass Cockpit
2. Dual Redundant Open Architecture Mission and Display Computer
3. Dual Redundant 1553B data bus
4. Advanced sensors, MMR, Helmet mounted sight , RWR and Litening pod.
5. Digital weapon management system comparable to russian western and etc.
6. Computer controlled utility system and management system.
7. Pylon interface boxes (PIB's)
8. Easy role change
MK-II:
1.Advanced glass cockpit with high performance graphics to support situational awareness, Decision Support and data fusion
2. Enhanced Powerful Graphics integrated with mission and display computer
3. Avionics Full-duple X-Switched Ethernet (AFDX) based back up avionics
4. Enhanced EW Suite and NextGen Lisening pod
5. AESA Radar
6. System on Chip (SoC) based design.
7. Universal Pylon Interface Computer (UPIC)
8. Digital Maps
9. Enhanced SWAP (Size, Wieght and Power)

[SaiK]

Mk.2 should take it to a quasi MCA class a/c. any MTOW increase?

[SaiK]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... _Fp8uWVV2I



tell me why i am laughing?

[member_23858]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... _Fp8uWVV2I



tell me why i am laughing?

Valid question...nothing wrong with 'Dassa Ra-fail'...

[nash]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... _Fp8uWVV2I



tell me why i am laughing?

[Austin]

Me thinks for 1200 kg hardpoint either Drop Tank or Nirbhai cruise missile is a possibility

[SaiK]

they can't increase brahmos range, but they can reduce it down to 1200kg with appropriate range reduction. possible?
say light-brahmos? 150 km

[SSridhar]

they can't increase brahmos range, but they can reduce it down to 1200kg with appropriate range reduction. possible?
say light-brahmos? 150 km

SaiK, the air-launched BrahMos will weigh 2.5T (to be deployed on Su-30 & P-8I). The future version will be slightly less than 2T and will be also deployed on FGFA. It is not being planned to be anywhere near 1T.

[SaiK]

Thanks SS.. i was just hypothesizing possibilities.

[ramana]

Indranil Thanks. I got my answers. Is there a plan to develop a twin 500kg hardpoint/rack to hang from the 1200kg hard point?

[rajanb]

RajitO

And successive IAF chiefs aren't?

And as stated above if at the end of the day it is all about capability why the heartburn when the IAF chooses to put that as the no. 1 consideration above the nationality of the vendor. You can't have it both ways.

Succesive IAF Chiefs are. I am sure you are reading the breaking news about the VVIP helios?

Aam Aadmi pilots aren't subjected to all this. Always worthwhile looking at the bigger picture.

[shiv]

what a beautiful video of tejas. infact lch/sarang videos were awesome too. Sharp moves. did they accept a deal for positive coverage for raffle saar we did the coverage as discussed saar...no no saar we really showed raffle saar.

Yes indeed. This is a good video and shows a better LCA show than 2011. Time to top of loop is 9 sec or so compared to 11-12 last time.

[merlin]

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-_vOp ... rences.jpg
not sure if merlin can provide us a better resolution. I notice they have either packaged the redundancy on the same mission and display computer or removed it.?

Thanks merlin and SaiK. We need a bigger picture!

Let me see what I can do on the weekend. Plan is to add some more info board pictures but I don't want to duplicate what has already been added. I will add the full resolution picture of that one.

[Indranil]

Indranil Thanks. I got my answers. Is there a plan to develop a twin 500kg hardpoint/rack to hang from the 1200kg hard point?

Don't sirjee. Never came across any effort of this kind.

You must be remembering this old model of LCA. It shows the inline dumb-bombs pylon. But, I don't think it is accurate anymore. It shows two 1200 ltr drop tank at stations 3 and 4 which is definitely not accurate. I had read earlier that Tejas can carry upto five 800 ltr drop tanks. But according to all latest posters and info on tejas.gov.in, it can carry fuel only at stations 1,2 and 7.

[member_20292]

OT but relevant to those obsessing about problems and losing sight of iterative development and expecting a perfect product from get go.

Here is massa's multibillion dollar program built on decades of experience.

http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog ... -the-f-35/
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... et-382078/

India in general does not have an RnD culture at all. Its ingrained into the core of Indian corporate society, who almost always like to compete on cost rather than tech.

So. there.

[Anujan]

^^^
What I found remarkable in those articles are that
(a) There are several "problems" in F35 multibillion dollar program like decreased T/W, reduced turn rate, reduced AoA ityadi
(b) Despite these difficulties, there is no chest beating and doctrine is revised to accomodate advantages like stealth. Because every product is a compromise in some way or other.

Imagine what would happen if someone tomorrow "reveals" that LCA turn rate is not as high as Mig2000. Shiv aroor will be shouting from rooftops and writing a 15 part articles on how CVDRE is bad and made a bad aircraft which cant even fire APFSDS shots.