'Make in India' Single engined fighter

[JayS]

^^^"MiG-35 warms up engines for new India sortie"
RAC is ingenious to say the least: they are going to claim engine unreliability as an advantage. Built-in redundancy for the single-engined fighter contract. Tagline: "Two engines but only one works"

LOL. Reminds me of PS4 (or maybe PS3), I read about many yrs ago, which has 8-core processor but they use only 7 of them. This is to reduce rejection rate. Since the probability of getting 7 of 8 cores functional in the chip is far more than getting 8 of 8. Similarly Ruskis make aircrafts haan ji?? At lease one of the two engines will work.

[Rakesh]

Sea Gripen is 100% vapourware.

Getting the Gripen would be the worst thing ever for Desh.
The Swedes can never offer us the stuff that the Khan's can. Carrier Catobar tech + later date F35 induction and US bolitical support.

With both the jets there'd be significant overlap with LCA capabilities, but if we will go down this road, it better be all American.. "strategic partners" afterall.

No one can afford multiple programs. You cannot purchase Gripen/F-Solah, Tejas, Rafale (only the first payment has been made), develop FGFA, develop AMCA, etc, etc, etc. Now there is a navy requirement for 57 fighters. If future defence budgets are any indication of the most recent defence budget, good luck!

Prime Minister Narasimha Rao - in the mid to late 1990s - sat in an Arjun tank at the Army parade ground and he extolled the virtues of the tank. I happened to read an article at that time stating that India cannot afford three separate tank programs. One or two of them is bound to suffer. You cannot have Arjun acquistion, T-90 acquistion (negotiations were going on the time) and T-72 upgradation. 20 years later, we know the story. I am not going to say more on tank acquisiton in this thread, but you get the gist.

In the same vein, you cannot afford multiple platforms. This is not about maintaining multiple platforms, but affording them. Some of them will suffer the arjun's fate. And I can tell you now, we will adopt the path of least resistance - import. Now we can nod our head and say no, however we have witnessed this tamasha before in the form of the Marut. We are destined to repeat history.

I agree with you on the Gripen's capabilities. And there is no doubt that the F-Solah, Block 70 is eons ahead of Paper NG. But this is not about buying an aircraft, but where we need to see India's aviation industry to go. You can laugh at me all you want, but I will say this. We are on the cusp of something great in the form of Tejas. There are developmental challenges ahead, but to purchase F-Solah, Block 70 or Paper NG is taking the heart out of the Tejas and stomping on it. Do not drink the kool aid nonsense that some on this forum are saying. Purchasing 200 single engine fighters is not going to do anything for the Tejas. They have not provided not one shred of evidence to state otherwise. It is bullshit sprinkled with gold dust to make the shit look good.

I say this without sarcasm. You either scrap the Tejas & AMCA programs altogether and purchase 200 F-Solahs and subsequent F-35s (down the road). Or you drop the single engine fighter purchase and you soldier on ahead with the Tejas and AMCA development. You cannot do both. No matter what anyone tells you.

[nirav]

^I agree with you on quite a few points.

The single engine requirements was floated after realising that the MMRCA was non parvadable.

Had we still pursued 126 Rafales + options, we might have had to see an either-or possibility wrt LCA.

With intent of induction of 100 foreign single engine birds, it had derisked LCAs program risk + also managed to save the LCA program by not making it strictly time sensitive. The timelines for LCA Mk2 are *really* FAR OUT.

If the F16 deal if finalised soon as is being rumoured, by 2020 we see almost 2 squadrons of LCA & solah re equipping the IAF on a yearly basis.

The LCA is here to stay.

[Lalmohan]

so all roads point to a sweep up of 2nd hand Mirage 2000's and maybe Mig 29's to keep the fleet numbers up whilst Tejas and AMCA are developed and inducted...

F16 makes absolutely no sense what so ever from any angle

[Neshant]

[
No one can afford multiple programs. You cannot purchase Gripen/F-Solah, Tejas, Rafale (only the first payment has been made), develop FGFA, develop AMCA, etc, etc, etc. Now there is a navy requirement for 57 fighters. If future defence budgets are any indication of the most recent defence budget, good luck!

This is 100% true.

The day a single engine fighter plane is imported is the day you'd know the LCA project has been junked.

Ditto for the day the T-90 tank was imported and rushed through trials some of which it even failed - and yet got rammed through.

Beware the power of arms lobbyists looking to destroy every indigenous project to keep the country dependent on endless expensive imports.

It's time to make the LCA in large numbers or shut down the entire chrade of domestic aerospace R&D.

[NRao]

No one can afford multiple programs. You cannot purchase Gripen/F-Solah, Tejas, Rafale (only the first payment has been made), develop FGFA, develop AMCA, etc, etc, etc. Now there is a navy requirement for 57 fighters. If future defence budgets are any indication of the most recent defence budget, good luck!

Very, very true.

Check out the USN right now.

However, ALL of them survived because of exports. Neither the Soviets or the US could have survived without exports. And, I happen to think, India does have a window to produce for exports. Pick any single engine plane and get behind it with a purpose to generate funds.

However, all that will be of no use unless the R&D can pump new techs and produce new platforms (not enhanced platforms, but brand new platforms). India cannot afford to look at one platform (no matter which ne) and be content with it.

[Cybaru]

so all roads point to a sweep up of 2nd hand Mirage 2000's and maybe Mig 29's to keep the fleet numbers up whilst Tejas and AMCA are developed and inducted...

F16 makes absolutely no sense what so ever from any angle

yeah and if they can be upgraded with the same AESA radar being earmarked for tejas, it could keep the second hand mirage line potent and very useful for the next 15-20 years.

[Cybaru]

I say this without sarcasm. You either scrap the Tejas & AMCA programs altogether and purchase 200 F-Solahs and subsequent F-35s (down the road). Or you drop the single engine fighter purchase and you soldier on ahead with the Tejas and AMCA development. You cannot do both. No matter what anyone tells you.

+100 Good points Rakesh.

[Rakesh]

Are F-16s a good choice for the Indian Air Force?
http://www.sify.com/news/are-f-16s-a-go ... dfiag.html

[NRao]

Lockheed says US May Take ‘Fresh Look’ at its Plan to Set Up F-16 Plant in India

The US company is keen to switch F-16 production to India, as long as the Indian government agrees to order hundreds of the planes, but concedes it needs to get the Trump administration on board first.

Trump has criticized U.S. companies that have moved manufacturing overseas and which then sell their products back to the U.S. In his first few weeks in office, he has pushed companies, from automakers to pharmaceutical firms, to produce more in the United States.

In Lockheed’s case, however, the plan is to build the F-16 to equip the Indian Air Force, and not sell them back into the United States.

Lockheed said it has been talking to Trump’s transition and governance teams as well as the U.S. Congress for several months on its plans, including the proposed sale of F-16 planes to India, a spokesman told Reuters in Washington.

“We’ve briefed the Administration on the current proposal, which was supported by the Obama Administration as part of a broader cooperative dialogue with the Government of India,” the spokesman said.

“We understand that the Trump Administration will want to take a fresh look at some of these programs, and we stand prepared to support that effort to ensure that any deal of this importance is properly aligned with U.S. policy priorities.”

[Philip]

Why buy an old hag,F-16, and then watch it get plastered by a Paki SU-35? That's quite a possibility from the latest report posted in the intl. td.

I agree that there seems to be a conspiracy to dump the LCA and buy a Yanqui hag,as this govt. is being seen more and more snowballing into the US mil camp. If numbers are the matter,as said in an above post,simply buy more MIG-29/35s-available on the cheap,better than F-16s and ramp up LCA production.This "single-engined fighter"has been deliberately made out to favour the F-16 ,while instead the search should've been made for any light/med fighter ,as the outgoing COAS said "we need 200+ Rafale type fighters"! Med. sized fighters will be far more capable than single-engined birds,able to carry a heavier weaponload and have greater range and endurance. In addition,they could even carry the proposed BMos-M missile,which will even be on the MIG-35,something none of the single-engined birds are capable of.

[nirav]

I'm not sure where are posters getting that if F16 comes that's end of story for LCA..

20+20+83 orders hai bhai..

If 100 F16s are hags to be shot down by paki Su-35s, than how's the LCA holding up against the same Su-35 !?
How are old and used M2K going to hold up for next 40 years ?

The 'buy used' was barely half heartedly considered and was junked a long time ago by the IAF.

IAF doesn't want used M2K, but some here still deem it fit to advise, hey, buy used M2K and make it work for next 40-50 years.

50 years is the duration for which Dassault is required to provide spares support to IAF as per their contract.

I'd love to see 300-400 LCAs in various configurations in IAF. It will happen too, but in a longer time frame.

Let's face a few facts before dismissing the Fsolahs totally...

The Mk1A is nowhere near even prototype testing as of today.The LCA has not obtained it's FOC as of today.

The 20+20 on order are NOT of FOC SoP, but instead of IOC SoP.
Assuming things don't get delayed, Mk1A will start production only in or after 20-21.
The 100 F-solah requirement and eventual induction will accord a great deal of Margin of Safety to the IAF whos faced with rapidly falling squadron numbers + HAL/ADA who can focus on MK1A and MK2 without its delay adversely affecting IAF combat capability overall.

As difficult as it maybe to acknowledge, it's the truth, the LCA is not and was never considered an adequate replacement for 126 MMRCA.

The air force has accepted a HUGE cut in planned capacity augmentation by accepting 100 odd single engine fighters in lieu of 126 Rafales.

You can't force them to buy used M2K bhangaar or tell them to "wait" another decade till 200 LCAs are finally produced.

[JayS]

The 20+20 on order are NOT of FOC SoP, but instead of IOC SoP.
Assuming things don't get delayed, Mk1A will start production only in or after 20-21.
The 100 F-solah requirement and eventual induction will accord a great deal of Margin of Safety to the IAF whos faced with rapidly falling squadron numbers + HAL/ADA who can focus on MK1A and MK2 without its delay adversely affecting IAF combat capability overall.

As difficult as it maybe to acknowledge, it's the truth, the LCA is not and was never considered an adequate replacement for 126 MMRCA.

The air force has accepted a HUGE cut in planned capacity augmentation by accepting 100 odd single engine fighters in lieu of 126 Rafales.

You can't force them to buy used M2K bhangaar or tell them to "wait" another decade till 200 LCAs are finally produced.

- 20+20+83 is IOC+FOC+MK1A respectively. The 20 FOC standard jets will be upgraded to Mk1A standard by default. If IAF chooses to do so, even the initial 20 IOC jets will be upgraded to MK1A, in a separate contract.

- Even with everything going as per plan, 2020-21 is realistic date for MK1A SP. But the preparation for 25/yr production rate can be done earlier. Within one yr the production can be ramped up to full speed. There is not much difference in MK1A and FOC, remember. We have 5yr. No reason why it can't be done.

- Well if second hand M2K is "bhangaar" then what is F-16 exactly..?? Not that I ever advocated buying second hand M2Ks but don't forget they will be upgraded and will be made as new as F-16 coming out of assembly lines. There is not practical distinction regarding this point.

- IAF can buy more single engine jets if they choose LCA, since its cheaper. 250 LCA for 126 MMRCA. F-16 is not all that cheaper compared to Rafale, considering additional cost of infra needed to host them.

- If LCA is not replacement for MMRCA, how the hell Gripen is being considered..?? Even F-16 doesn't make the cut.

- Even F16 will take a decade for 200nos. Unless you buy them in fly away condition directly from US plant.

[nirav]

There's actually Huge difference between Mk1A and FOC.

One of the main 'features' of the Mk1A is a 1000 Kg reduction than the FOC version.

Now for the moment, the only Sop that's frozen is the IOC version which is under production.
Since FOC hasn't been ticked off yet, the Sop for the same won't be frozen until FOC is actually achieved.

Iirc the cost for setting up a production rate of 16/yr from current 8/yr was 2500 Crs.
Sure another 2500 crores can be spent to hike the rate to 24/yr.

Incur all this expense to produce something who's SoP hasn't been finalised yet(FOC) or something which is a radically different fighter @ 1000 Kg lighter than current versions(Mk1A) ?

There are considerable uncertainties about the bulk of the 83 Mk1A coming online on *time* factoring in the engineering challenge of trimming 1000 Kg , flight testing it and clearing it for production..

In light of this, the single engine requirement is very valid as it lets the IAF and MoD reduce program risk of the LCA and allows re equipment of the IAF to proceed at a decent pace without putting IAF operational capability in jeopardy.

I'm positive that the IAF when given an option for 100 brand new Fsolahs or used M2K for which it would have to shell out big billions to upgrade at 2/yr or 4/yr will take the F16 option anyday.

[ranjan.rao]

Why buy an old hag,F-16, and then watch it get plastered by a Paki SU-35? That's quite a possibility from the latest report posted in the intl. td.

I agree that there seems to be a conspiracy to dump the LCA and buy a Yanqui hag,as this govt. is being seen more and more snowballing into the US mil camp. If numbers are the matter,as said in an above post,simply buy more MIG-29/35s-available on the cheap,better than F-16s and ramp up LCA production.This "single-engined fighter"has been deliberately made out to favour the F-16 ,while instead the search should've been made for any light/med fighter ,as the outgoing COAS said "we need 200+ Rafale type fighters"! Med. sized fighters will be far more capable than single-engined birds,able to carry a heavier weaponload and have greater range and endurance. In addition,they could even carry the proposed BMos-M missile,which will even be on the MIG-35,something none of the single-engined birds are capable of.

{Sarcasm on}Phillip really!! our great friend Russia is going to sell Su-35 {Sarcasm over},
{Reality on} who's gonna pay for this, with all due respect to your knowledge, this one goes into the realm of speculation, and in that case we would be better off planning to fight against F35/F22s and we should order a nimitz and zumawalt

[Cybaru]

Iirc the cost for setting up a production rate of 16/yr from current 8/yr

Where are we getting this 8 number from? This is something we can confirm from Aero India 2017, but I would think that HALs current capacity (space for jigs and the jigs) would be the 16 that is planned from 2019-2020 onwards. It added an extra 3/4 in form of secondary line and now CCS cleared a third line to double capacity. I think we need someone to clarify what the real numbers are, but if what I am thinking is correct, then we can expect another order of 80 odd planes that will be produced on the third line.

[NRao]

we should order a nimitz

FYI, the Russians have offered a 100,000 ton, nuclear powered, EMALS ship to India. Not yet there.





However, nirav, by far and large I agree. I do not see the death of the LCA, although I just do not see the MK-II.

The fact that DRDO/HAL were in talks with SAAB (in 2016) and SAAB has offered help for the MK-1A, so late in the game, itself shows where that project stands.

Again, we tend to compare a plane to something we are comfortable with, but, the F-16 (or even the Gripen) bring more to the table than just a plane. Something we neglect to take into consideration, which the likes of Modi gave to. His goal has to be beyond just an aircraft. He has no choice.

[Cybaru]

we should order a nimitz

The fact that DRDO/HAL were in talks with SAAB (in 3016) and SAAB has offered help in the MK-1A itself shows where that project stands so late in the game.

Who knows what the talks with gripen are about, they could equally be about work load sharing to create the next gen twin engine platform if they invest.

If we order an AESA radar from outside like the HAL tender says they are about to, Gripen doesn't add anything new.
If we produce a kaveri like the RM-12 is produced (worse case outcome), which is majority in India, with the hot and IP protected parts coming from Sarfran, we are gripen equivalent in so many ways.
if we add Astra/Sudarshaan/Saaw to Tejas, we are ahead of Gripen in ways.

[Kartik]

^^^"MiG-35 warms up engines for new India sortie"
RAC is ingenious to say the least: they are going to claim engine unreliability as an advantage. Built-in redundancy for the single-engined fighter contract. Tagline: "Two engines but only one works"

[Kartik]

There's actually Huge difference between Mk1A and FOC.

One of the main 'features' of the Mk1A is a 1000 Kg reduction than the FOC version.

Source??

On the contrary, Suvarna Raju is on record as having stated that the Mk1A is actually going to be very slightly heavier than the Mk1.

HAL developing LCA-1P with AESA radar

The new LCA-MkI-P variant with the EW Package will also add some 50 kilos of more weight, but then, Mr Raju explained, the capability of the aircraft increases significantly, offsetting the disadvantage of a smaller engine.
The current LCA-MkI version uses 210 kilos with ballast in the nose to stabilize the aircraft. This will be removed, and the AESA and EW suite weighing about 250 kilos will be added. The net weight gain will be of about 50 kilos.

[NRao]

Janes: http://www.janes.com/article/61828/indi ... a-squadron

June, 2016.

The Indian Air Force is to raise its first Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Mk 1 squadron in Bangalore after it receives the first two indigenously developed fighters from manufacturer Hindustan Aeronautics Limited on 1 July. Christened the Flying Daggers 45, the squadron will receive six more LCA by 2017, ahead of inducting 12 more, including tandem seat trainers, by 2019.

The follow-on five LCA squadrons of around 100 aircraft, however, will comprise the upgraded LCA Mk 1A, which at 6,500 kg will be 1,000 kg lighter than the Mk 1 and fitted with ELTA Systems' active electronically-scanned array radar.

[NRao]

Seems to me that the decision making in India is slower than the speed at which technology is progressing. This does not seem to include risks - which are acceptable speed bumps (IMHO). A year seems to be the unit for making decision/s.

[Cosmo_R]

^^^"You can't force them to buy used M2K bhangaar or tell them to "wait" another decade till 200 LCAs are finally produced."
+1
The IAF should have to only worry about operational needs given the task. It is not in their job description to worry about R&D and 'indigenous' capability building.

[nirav]

Kartik ji,
The link you have posted has no mention whatsoever of the 83 agreed by the MoD and IAF.it also states that only 40 will be powered by F404 engine which is incorrect.The Mk1A is intended to be equipped with the 404 IN variant.

I guess it pre dates the decision to go in for Mk1A.

I also recall huge discussion on the 1000 Kg weight reduction if its even possible on the LCA dhagaa..

That link as 'source' is deletable.

[nirav]

Seems to me that the decision making in India is slower than the speed at which technology is progressing. This does not seem to include risks - which are acceptable speed bumps (IMHO). A year seems to be the unit for making decision/s.

I believe the biggest learning out of the LCA project is in the form of project management.. especially how not to run a project.

With the AMCA not off the boards yet, we might do well to take the LCA lessons into account and ensure the same approach to project management is not repeated again.

ADA should be merged with HAL and then let AMCA be a 100% HAL project.

[Kartik]

Janes: http://www.janes.com/article/61828/indi ... a-squadron

June, 2016.

The Indian Air Force is to raise its first Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Mk 1 squadron in Bangalore after it receives the first two indigenously developed fighters from manufacturer Hindustan Aeronautics Limited on 1 July. Christened the Flying Daggers 45, the squadron will receive six more LCA by 2017, ahead of inducting 12 more, including tandem seat trainers, by 2019.

The follow-on five LCA squadrons of around 100 aircraft, however, will comprise the upgraded LCA Mk 1A, which at 6,500 kg will be 1,000 kg lighter than the Mk 1 and fitted with ELTA Systems' active electronically-scanned array radar.

6500 kg is the empty weight of the Mk1 itself.

[Rakesh]

I'm not sure where are posters getting that if F16 comes that's end of story for LCA..

20+20+83 orders hai bhai..

You cannot order 123 LCAs and then purchase 200 Gripens or F-Solahs. Both programs will suffer. Allow me to explain.

200 phoren fighters + 123 desi fighters to do the same task is pointless. Both platforms (desi and phoren) need separate crews for maintenance, separate crews for qualified pilots (most air forces require you to be qualified on a type before you can optimize its full potential), separate sets of spares, even the jigs, tools, training of personnel used to manufacture the planes will be different. Why do double the effort and spend billions for two platforms that are designed to do the same thing?

It makes a whole lot of better economic sense to purchase the following - 323 (200 + 123) phoren or desi fighters. You do not need both. It is a waste of money and time. That is why it makes better sense to cancel the Tejas and go in for 323 phoren fighters OR cancel the single engine fighter purchase and focus on the Tejas.

If 100 F16s are hags to be shot down by paki Su-35s, than how's the LCA holding up against the same Su-35 !?

Oh my. Going by the above logic then we will surely lose Kashmir. Why Kashmir, we will lose Hindustan onlee! I might as well buy a skull cap and practise my namaz. Allah Hu Abkar, Allah Hu Akbar!!

How are old and used M2K going to hold up for next 40 years? The 'buy used' was barely half heartedly considered and was junked a long time ago by the IAF. The IAF doesn't want used M2K, but some here still deem it fit to advise, hey, buy used M2K and make it work for next 40-50 years.

When the IAF itself has no plans to keep her current 51 Mirage 2000s flying for the next 40 years (2057 as per your calculations), from where in heaven's name are you coming up with this number? Even with the Dash-9 upgrade, the IAF has no plans to keep the aircraft in service for more than 15 - 20 years! That is 2032 - 2037!

50 years is the duration for which Dassault is required to provide spares support to IAF as per their contract.

Show me the contract where it states so. I would love to know your source on this issue. You are referring to the Mirage 2000 right?

I'd love to see 300-400 LCAs in various configurations in IAF. It will happen too, but in a longer time frame.

It will not happen if the phoren single engine fighter purchase goes through. This same line of argument was used for the Arjun. This is true whether it is Paper NG or F-Solah.

Finally when the AMCA comes on board, the same line of argument will be used. No suppliers, too late, too many developmental problems. Oh wait, we have F-35! Let's buy that. Also way cheaper, because F-35 has onlee one engine!

[Kartik]

Kartik ji,
The link you have posted has no mention whatsoever of the 83 agreed by the MoD and IAF.it also states that only 40 will be powered by F404 engine which is incorrect.The Mk1A is intended to be equipped with the 404 IN variant.

I guess it pre dates the decision to go in for Mk1A.

I also recall huge discussion on the 1000 Kg weight reduction if its even possible on the LCA dhagaa..

That link as 'source' is deletable.

Because, it was from the time when we first heard of the LCA Mk1P- later on called the Mk1A. The source was none other than HAL's Suvarna Raju. The point that was made about replacing the ballast and the Elta 2032 with the AESA radar seems legit, versus some 1000 kg figure thrown in randomly. small weight reductions are likely, but a wholescale 15-20% weight reduction seems too high a figure.

[Karan M]

1000KG reduction is not as easy as writing it in Janes and voila it appears. Judging by what was finally agreed on Mk1A weight == Mk1 weight since the EW pod will be carried externally and the 200 odd kgs of spare capacity will be taken up by the AESA system.

[nirav]

I'm not sure where are posters getting that if F16 comes that's end of story for LCA..

20+20+83 orders hai bhai..

You cannot order 123 LCAs and then purchase 200 Gripens or F-Solahs. Both programs will suffer. Allow me to explain.

200 phoren fighters + 123 desi fighters to do the same task is pointless. Both platforms (desi and phoren) need separate crews for maintenance, separate crews for qualified pilots (most air forces require you to be qualified on a type before you can optimize its full potential), separate sets of spares, even the jigs, tools, training of personnel used to manufacture the planes will be different. Why do double the effort for a platform that is designed to do the same thing?

It makes a whole lot of better economic sense to purchase the following - 323 (200 + 123) phoren or desi fighters. You do not need both. It is a waste of resources and time. That is why it makes better sense to cancel the Tejas and go in for 323 phoren fighters OR cancel the single engine fighter purchase and focus on the Tejas.

Rakesh ji,

The foreign line is targetting 100 birds for the time being.Not sure why you are considering 200 phoren phyters !

you have repeatedly been talking about it being an either/or situation.However as indications from MoD are, 20+20+83 LCAs is *happening*, no matter what.

if you have any credible govt source which states that we cannot afford 100 foreign fighters + 123 LCAs, please share the same.
Further, the link Kartik ji posted quoted HAL chairman that the LCA MK1 P would be flying in 2017. Its no where in sight if we were to take it as a credible source.

Ive been highlighting this very point, if the prototype itself has started facing delays, slippages in production are bound to happen.

In the beginning of this thread Karan M saar has posted that HAL chairman had stated that production cannot exceed 16/yr cause of supply side issues. If it were a simple case of paisa feko,tamasha dekho im sure Parrikar ji would have blown a couple billion dollas to 'fix everything' and produce 50/yr. It doesnt work that way.

IMHO, 100 Fsolah and 123 LCAs is a derisked yet sure shot way of getting squadrons up without breaking bank aka 126 Raffles.

If 100 F16s are hags to be shot down by paki Su-35s, than how's the LCA holding up against the same Su-35 !?

Oh my. Going by the above logic then we will surely lose Kashmir. Why Kashmir, we will lose Hindustan onlee! I might as well buy a skull cap and practise my namaz. Allah Hu Abkar, Allah Hu Akbar!!

108% agree with you. Do direct it to the right person,Philip saar, though .. he said Fsolahs are hags which paki Su-35s will shoot down.. pew pew onlee ..

How are old and used M2K going to hold up for next 40 years? The 'buy used' was barely half heartedly considered and was junked a long time ago by the IAF. The IAF doesn't want used M2K, but some here still deem it fit to advise, hey, buy used M2K and make it work for next 40-50 years.

When the IAF itself has no plans to keep her current 51 Mirage 2000s flying for the next 40 years (2057 as per your calculations), from where in heaven's name are you coming up with this number? Even with the Dash-9 upgrade, the IAF has no plans to keep the aircraft in service for more than 15 - 20 years! That is 2032 - 2037!

50 years is the duration for which Dassault is required to provide spares support to IAF as per their contract.

Show me the contract where it states so. I would love to know your source on this issue. You are referring to the Mirage 2000 right?

Link
The 50 years support is for the Rafale. Im quoting that number to guys advocating 'buy used m2k and upgrade them'.
My argument is that brand new F16s have a better supply chain to ensure product support for the time IAF expects to use them vs used m2ks which btw entail a badass upgrade cost. getting a 100 M2K off the used market itself could be a tough ask.
used F16s ? maybe not.But the point is IAF is NOT looking for used jets. The whole discussion on used jets is moot.

Because, it was from the time when we first heard of the LCA Mk1P- later on called the Mk1A. The source was none other than HAL's Suvarna Raju. The point that was made about replacing the ballast and the Elta 2032 with the AESA radar seems legit, versus some 1000 kg figure thrown in randomly. small weight reductions are likely, but a wholescale 15-20% weight reduction seems too high a figure.

I went through that link again.Im convinced its junkable.Check this.

HAL Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) T Suvarna Raju told India Strategic in an interview that HAL shared the technology concerns of the user – IAF – as well as the urgency for production of the aircraft in view of the falling numbers of IAF combat squadrons due to obsolescence. The AESA and EW suite will make the new LCA variant more advanced than the supersonic MiG 21s in capability, even though it will be a subsonic aircraft compared to the ageing aircraft of the Soviet vintage.

They've attributed this quote to the HAL Chairman.Its shoddy reporting.

I think you missed the pages worth of 'discussion' on how HAL was going to reduce 800-1000 KGs off of the LCA.
I do hope they've dropped the idea and continue with just the other 'major areas of improvement'.

Do check the link posted by NRao ji. Its from 2016, mentions the 1000KGs clearly.

[Karan M]

^^ India Strategic is not junkable, just siftable. They are not familiar with many of the aero etc programs but not agenda driven. They were (along with Saurav Jha), the first to break the LCA Mk1 + AESA story. Shukla was a follow up.

The link posted by NRao may be from 2017 but the quantum of task is very significnat and equivalent, almost, to a LCA Mk2 level of system level redesign. Not likely IMHO because if it had been the case, reports would have mentioned the performance boost. At best if a few hundred kgs are saved that will itself be tremendous achievement for densely pack LCA system

[NRao]

Seems to me that the decision making in India is slower than the speed at which technology is progressing. This does not seem to include risks - which are acceptable speed bumps (IMHO). A year seems to be the unit for making decision/s.

I believe the biggest learning out of the LCA project is in the form of project management.. especially how not to run a project.

With the AMCA not off the boards yet, we might do well to take the LCA lessons into account and ensure the same approach to project management is not repeated again.

ADA should be merged with HAL and then let AMCA be a 100% HAL project.

I have no idea of what the solution is - too far from all that. However, what you suggest - that changes need to be made has been on the table since the 1980s. What is sad is that next door ISRO seems to thrive!!!

Janes: http://www.janes.com/article/61828/indi ... a-squadron

June, 2016.

6500 kg is the empty weight of the Mk1 itself.

I posted because the question was asked. I do not follow details of such things.

[nirav]

^^ India Strategic is not junkable, just siftable. They are not familiar with many of the aero etc programs but not agenda driven. They were (along with Saurav Jha), the first to break the LCA Mk1 + AESA story. Shukla was a follow up.

The link posted by NRao may be from 2017 but the quantum of task is very significnat and equivalent, almost, to a LCA Mk2 level of system level redesign. Not likely IMHO because if it had been the case, reports would have mentioned the performance boost. At best if a few hundred kgs are saved that will itself be tremendous achievement for densely pack LCA system

I meant that specific article as credible source..
I wish them well if indeed they arent agenda driven ..

@ the MK1A - theres incredible lack of clarity .. will they/wont they @ 800-1000 Kg weight reduction .. ?
Which power plant .. has to be F404 IN20 .. what will they do with 99 F414s already ordered ? will mostly use in MK2 .. But then when will they order 100 odd F404 IN20s ?

then where do they find space for Kaveri when it comes online after consultancy and requisite testing with dassault/safran ?
Surely they wont aim to re engine a F404 equipped LCA with the Kaveri ?!

@suggestion- me too NRao ji. it was a desperate 'suggestion' by the jingo in me to eventually see desh put own house in order @ fighter jet design/manufacture.
Experts of course know better whats to be done. An expert committee needs to be setup wrt AMCA and deliver report in next two years on how to streamline the project and stick to realistic deadlines.
The jingo in me is thoroughly disheartened that even in our wildest dreams no one even talks of a HCA.
"Light" took decades .. not sure when "medium" will come .. will we even attempt a "heavy" in our far out future ?

[Karan M]

800-1000kgs is sci-fi IMHO, at best a few hundred kgs if lucky, and likely not even that.

F414s were not ordered but planned for, and the selection happened. But we havent signed a firm deal or paid for them AFAIK. Anyways MP has cleared Mk2 so there is time.

The MK1A will be existing Mk1 engine.

Kaveri IMHO is non starter for LCA now. At best, it will be used for AMCA.

[NRao]

FYI:

Trump Administration May Reboot Lockheed Martin’s F-16 India Plans

"They're following it closely and talking with the White House. But if they don't move production to India, there's no way they'll get the India contract," the person said.

One argument to be made was that moving to India would preserve some component production in the United States. "Twenty-five percent of something is better than zero percent of nothing," the person said.

[negi]

India has reached a juncture where we need to make a hard decision this chai-biskoot talk about security concerns , geopolotics etc are all hot air we are not going to fight a war with TSP . We have sucked at procurement for so long so I would say let us bear with it for 5-10 more years and go all full steam with only Tejas . It needs to be pushed down the throat of both IAF and IN ; as for the argument that it might not tbe the best; so fckn what we are not building a fighter so that fanboys on forums get to say that it is better than F-22 or F-35 we just need a functional fighter which is good enough , anything better than it can't sure outfly a robust air defense system an area where we seem to be doing well. A strong fighter fleet with long legs are needed by those who want to bring democracy to the world or have imperialistic designs , we think 10 times even before taking arms to defend ourselves so why this fascination with best fighter out there ? Let us build one, the best can wait.

[Philip]

The F-16s are supposedly being acquired to replace the LCAs which cannot come off the line fast enough. Pak already possesses around 70-100 JF-17s,plan for 200 or so plus exports.Their best fighter as of now is the F-16,which has been upgraded .Acquisition by Pak of SU_35s ,apart from the Chinese will be a dramatic development seriously undermining the IAF's superiority which it currently enjoys. If we are to sign on wiht the FGFA,etc. we should obtain from Russia an ssurance that game-changing mil-eqpt. will be barred for Pak. The same strategy should also be used with the US. The US cannot expect India to buy its milware while ti still sells such eqpt. to Pak,making money out of our misery.

My contention in the post was that it would be asinine to spend billions in legacy hags instead on the best of the latest that we can afford.

[Cain Marko]

Hmm, it just occurred to me....why the heck are they even thinking of 83 mk1a, why not instead just order all of them at foc std, with derby, astra, python and dash hms, a2a, this will be quite potent. As good a the mirage upg. A2a. Will help in increasing production rates and removes the uncertainty surrounding mk1a, which ada can continue to work on...

I have a nasty feeling that Admiral sahab might be correct....there is little talk of mk1a, and if there is some delay, or negative press, the whole shebang could be junked in favor of phoren phyter..lca capped at 40.

Also, Does ge even produce the f404 anymore?

[abhik]

^^^
Just like the IA wont be accept the Arjun Mk x until 420 improvements are implemented, but will live with faulty tin cans and buy new versions as and when they are available.

[Nick_S]

Swedish Defence Major Saab offers Gripen- E Fighter Production Facility In India -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxcOVp1ey6w


SAAB Q & A -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdX2XbXUyoQ