Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

>> MHO I don't think so. I think Gajraj are here to stay up till 2030.

they will need to be zero-houred by ilyushin and re-engining with the PS90 in that case . for some reason ilyushin was not able to offer vendor direct overhauls last yr so IAF had floated a global tender for anyone who could provide certain level of service and uptime iirc.

even with overhaul each airframe has some N thousand hrs life I think beyond which it is dangerous to push it and nobody will certify its safety, for fighters it ranges from 4000-6000 hrs flight time these days...dont know for transports...probably more.
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3280
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by VinodTK »

Apache choppers to support Army's operational plans: Air chief
New inductions in the IAF such as Apache attack helicopters will be in support of operational plans of the Army, which is raising a new Strike Corps along the borders with China in the north eastern sector, Air Chief

Marshal N A K Browne said today.

"Whatever inductions are taking place in the IAF, they will fully support the Army's plans. All the strike helicopters like the Apache...they will all support the Army's

plans," he told reporters on the sidelines of a seminar here.

The proposal was first sent by the Army but it was returned by the government which asked the three services to work together on plans to strengthen their capabilities in

that region.

"We sent the revised plan to the Defence Ministry in December," Browne said.

The IAF is planning to deploy majority of its new inductions such as the additional C-130 J transport planes and six new midair re fueling tanker aircraft at the proposed headquarters of the new Corps in Panagarh in West Bengal to strengthen country 's defence capabilities in that sector, IAF sources said.

The force is also planning to station part of the fleet of 22 Apache helicopters being procured from the US in that sector.

The proposal is awaiting clearance from Defence Ministry's Finance Wing and its cost is being estimated.

Commenting on how the cut of around Rs 12,000 crore in the defence budget was affecting his force, Browne said, "Well we have the 42 Su-30MKI aircraft. The contract (for the additional planes) has to be signed. Payments have to be made
:
:
:
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vina »

The IAF brass believes that HAL made a major blunder in deciding to change the IJT’s engine, replacing the French Larzac engine around which the Sitara was designed, with a more powerful AL-55I engine built by Russian engine-maker, NPO-Saturn. In 2005, HAL signed a $350 million contract with Russian defence export agency, Rosoboronexport, to build 250 AL-55I engines under license in Bangalore, with an option for 1000 more. After developing the engine, Moscow insisted on payment of another $64 million.
I had commented on this before. We are total suckers, a bunch of dimwits and volunteer guinea pigs who paid in treasure AND in program delays so that the Russians could experiment on us to develop a replacement for an existing Ukranian engine for their jet trainers.

If you want to be voluntary pasties as a country , get used to being taken for suckers and getting kicked in the nuts. Don't whine over it and suck it up.

But to pass on the blame to HAL by the IAF is facetious. I think it was the IAF which wanted the engine replacement, and goaded HAL to get a more "powerful" engine, which of course was the Ukranian (AI-25/AI-222 /DV2 etc), which the chinese went and got from the Ukranians.

It is the MoD/IAF kind of "Stratejee" / "extra clever" decision making of sucking up to the Russians , who want to put their own engines instead of the Ukranian ones on their Yak and Mig AT trainers. The Russians kicked them in the nuts. So , what does the IAF do ? Pass the buck on to HAL of course!
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by shiv »

vina wrote:
I had commented on this before. We are total suckers, a bunch of dimwits and volunteer guinea pigs who paid in treasure AND in program delays so that the Russians could experiment on us to develop a replacement for an existing Ukranian engine for their jet trainers.

If you want to be voluntary pasties as a country , get used to being taken for suckers and getting kicked in the nuts. Don't whine over it and suck it up.

!
+1

The IAF too need to understand that Indian industry like HAL are working near the limits of India's national technical capability and if they demand more they are demanding import and demanding that they get kicked in the nuts. It sems to me that the fond wet dreams that we have seen among Indians that some mythical Birla or Tata has more engine and aerospace experience than HAL is a mental disease that the IAF too may have suffered from - given that all of us Indians go thorugh the same education and hold the same attitudes.
suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4112
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by suryag »

Wingco Unni had a wonderful slide where he showed that the cost of developing ALH+LCH+LUH was less than the cost of development of an Indica which was 1750cr. He also showed that ALH took 15 years from dev to reach the level of IOC and NH90 and other copters took 14-16 years.

Private participation should be brought in at a subsystem level and then with maturity their scope should be expanded
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vina »

Wingco Unni had a wonderful slide where he showed that the cost of developing ALH+LCH+LUH was less than the cost of development of an Indica which was 1750cr
Yes. In the broad sense, a very good comparison. However a quibble. The indica number includes PPE (property , plant and equipment) numbers in addition to the core engg /prod development.

HAL didn't have to set up a new assembly line /plant for the ALH. It used the amortized line from Chetak/Cheetah if I am correct.

But all the same, developing 3 helicopters (even if 2 are derivatives of a base design) for Rs 1750 cr is incredibly good.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vina »

shiv wrote:go thorugh the same education and hold the same attitudes.
Oh. Don't even get me started on that.

Remember that dude Prof Prodyut Das and his articles in Vayu about some ultra cheap put together in tens of thousands and armed with only a gun, and powered by the super duper AL-55I (the engine that is in the IJT).. sort of like the "People's Airforce" the air force analog of a "People's Army" .. where you have rag tag peasants in millions armed with a bolt action rifle ? Now that the fact the Al-55 is not even mature to be put on the IJT, think how deluded that garbled rambling was.

If that is on the one side, on the other side, you have "Rodina Lovers" , who have pet fetishes (like Indu-Roosi bhai-bhai) and make believe passing for hard nosed strategy. Russia shafted us in the Cryogenic Engine for GSLV. Not only they stopped the tech transfer, but in addition, sold us an "experimental" one, which got debugged only in GSLV (underperformance in 2 flights, loss of structural integrity in two more, with the final one resulting in destruction of the vehicle!).. Rinse wash and repeat the same thing for the IJT engine, with us being guinea pigs for Russian development projects. Or take the case of Vik-Ad /Gorshkov sordid saga. If the Navy had just gone ahead and built the IDS, we would have the hull in the water. What the Russians did was take our money and build back the industrial capability that was lost to Ukraine in the Soviet Union break up for carriers! Smart! Feed your neighbour’s child while starving your own.

With prize idiots like that (in common with our socialist commie ding dongs of the JNU/DSE/ISI/ kind) who refuse to learn from experience and common sense still in positions of influence, it is a miracle we atleast are where we are today.
Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1130
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Hiten »

oops. Wrong thread
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vina »

Karan M wrote:*Talking about HAL not investing in R&D, when enough literature exists to note HAL asked for it repeatedly but was rebuffed in the 80's, eg a Jaguar FBW testbed
Pliss to Link. Would love to see such "littrachaw".
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by tsarkar »

shiv wrote:The IAF too need to understand that Indian industry like HAL are working near the limits of India's national technical capability and if they demand more they are demanding import and demanding that they get kicked in the nuts. It sems to me that the fond wet dreams that we have seen among Indians that some mythical Birla or Tata has more engine and aerospace experience than HAL is a mental disease that the IAF too may have suffered from - given that all of us Indians go thorugh the same education and hold the same attitudes.
While HAL et al are working to the limits of their technological capability, it is but harnessing less than 1% of India's overall technical potential. The rest of India's potential is untapped.

Potential of not Tata, nor Birla but companies like Belgaum, Karnataka based Quest Global founded 1997

http://www.quest-global.com/borad-of-directors.html
http://www.quest-global.com/milestones-2008-2011.html
http://www.quest-global.com/who-we-are.html

http://www.quest-global.com/newsdetails ... ]Bangalore, India, 29th November, 2012: QuEST Global Manufacturing signed a Joint Venture agreement with global Defence and Security major, Saab to set up an ‘Aerostructure Assembly Joint Venture’. The new entity will manufacture and supply assemblies for the technology intense commercial aerostructures market.[/quote]

or this one http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/com ... 382838.ece

Companies like these spearhead innovation using their own resources, yet are excluded from national programs, because they're not a part of the government apple cart.

Ofcourse, for now, they cant build full engines or fighters or tanks on their own all by themselves, but they can do R&D on critical components, and gradually scale up.

Once India starts tapping these resources, then our full potential will be unleashed.

The IT industry has a concept called crowdsourcing. For the Indian Aerospace Industry, I suggest a concept of national sourcing, wherein programs are broken down into projects, and each project is assigned via technical bidding to the best possible engineering team (public or private), and the entire program concurrently managed by the prime integrator.
Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 534
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Nick_S »

Singha wrote:even with overhaul each airframe has some N thousand hrs life I think beyond which it is dangerous to push it and nobody will certify its safety, for fighters it ranges from 4000-6000 hrs flight time these days...dont know for transports...probably more.
USAF F-15 are being rated for crazy amount of hrs.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... fe-365200/
Boeing's tests will determine if the service life of the F-15C/D can be extended from 9,000h to 18,000h, Jones said. The service life of the F-15E was originally set at 8,000h but could potentially be raised to 32,000h after the tests are complete. :eek:
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by member_20453 »

Actually B-52s, F-15sc F-18SHs are in their own league for air frame life, easily among the most robust fighters and bombers ever made.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

C135 too.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Lalmohan »

nothing beats the DC3
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14778
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Aditya_V »

Septimus P. wrote:Actually B-52s, F-15sc F-18SHs are in their own league for air frame life, easily among the most robust fighters and bombers ever made.
Could it be since they are practicing less of Dogfight manuvers and a lot of flying is done intercontinental flights, that it is apple to oranges comparison, as many of those hours will be ferry hours as compared to say Mig-21 sorties??
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by John »

vina wrote:But to pass on the blame to HAL by the IAF is facetious. I think it was the IAF which wanted the engine replacement, and goaded HAL to get a more "powerful" engine, which of course was the Ukranian (AI-25/AI-222 /DV2 etc), which the chinese went and got from the Ukranians.
How It IAF's fault for HAL failing to realize that IJT would have been quite underpowered with Larzac and platform would have good as dead. IAF didn't hold HAL at gunpoint to choose Al-55I.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7827
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by rohitvats »

Aditya_V wrote:
Septimus P. wrote:Actually B-52s, F-15sc F-18SHs are in their own league for air frame life, easily among the most robust fighters and bombers ever made.
Could it be since they are practicing less of Dogfight manuvers and a lot of flying is done intercontinental flights, that it is apple to oranges comparison, as many of those hours will be ferry hours as compared to say Mig-21 sorties??
While I'm not sure it is about less dog-fight or ACM practice, flight time per sortie could be the factor. From what I've read, the flight time per sortie is higher. This is both due to more endurance of their planes and congested nature of US airspace where planes have to be beyond the corridor for commercial air-traffic. As it is, they don't have airspace to defend.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7827
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by rohitvats »

Sagar G wrote:I have a better idea all the HAL facilities should be carpet bombed by IAF and any surviving candidate should be decapitated by our SF guys, doing so would be a great service to the nation. I mean it's always a better idea to run in the middle of a war begging in front of foreigners to allow us to modify there aircrafts so as to carry out precision strikes than trying to make an aircraft all by ourselves which will result in our independence from foreign arm twisting. I don't know which moron came up with this idea of trying to make an aerospace sector in India when we can purchase foreign aircrafts and proudly pose in front of them. Look at the pride in the faces of IAF afsars, I cannot imagine the same look had it been an SDRE made aircraft. They wouldn't even have posed for a photo op. infront of a dirty poor SDRE plane. LCA must be scrapped right now it's a shame for the country that we are trying to make a 4.5th gen plane when the same is available in foreign markets. DIE HAL DIE...........
MODS: I had reported this post as well as leave a message on this thread.

I'm yet to receive a response on the same. Awaiting your response. Thanks.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

tsarkar wrote:Companies like these spearhead innovation using their own resources, yet are excluded from national programs, because they're not a part of the government apple cart.
From your link in milestones section...
Oct-08 : QuEST Global gets Govt. of India notification to lease out land at its precision engineering SEZ at Belgaum
GoI seems to be keeping an eye but it will take time before we start seeing results of the investments made by this firm.
tsarkar wrote:Ofcourse, for now, they cant build full engines or fighters or tanks on their own all by themselves, but they can do R&D on critical components, and gradually scale up.
This is a problem right now with the pvt. sector they aren't investing much in R&D as they should be, the public sector does but that isn't enough as can be seen by the recent statement of Anthony. Going through the link posted by you it doesn't seem they are investing in R&D since nothing relating to the same is mentioned their or in the sites of the other companies run by them. All they seem to be doing is setting up JV's and doing screw driver manufacturing. I can be totally wrong here but this seems to be the case to me.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

Lifafa journo gives out about his credentials in the first para itself, IJT is already a failure :roll: Seems that very fat lifafa's have arrived from foreign shores to produce another hitjob about HAL.
John wrote:How It IAF's fault for HAL failing to realize that IJT would have been quite underpowered with Larzac and platform would have good as dead. IAF didn't hold HAL at gunpoint to choose Al-55I.
HAL also didn't declare jeehard on IAF in case it wouldn't agree on the new engine so what is this new passing game going on about it's your fault, it's your fault ???
SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1163
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by SagarAg »

Sagar G wrote:
Lifafa journo gives out about his credentials in the first para itself, IJT is already a failure :roll: Seems that very fat lifafa's have arrived from foreign shores to produce another hitjob about HAL.
John wrote:How It IAF's fault for HAL failing to realize that IJT would have been quite underpowered with Larzac and platform would have good as dead. IAF didn't hold HAL at gunpoint to choose Al-55I.
HAL also didn't declare jeehard on IAF in case it wouldn't agree on the new engine so what is this new passing game going on about it's your fault, it's your fault ???
Its always HAL fault :(( :(( :(( :cry:
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

MHA objects to IAF men abandoning injured cop, fleeing
NEW DELHI: The home ministry has written to the defence ministry, objecting to the conduct of Indian Air Force personnel who abandoned an injured state police wireless operator and their weapons to rush to safety after a chopper crash in Chhattisgarh last month.

Home secretary RK Singh wrote to defence secretary Sashi Kant Sharma on January 30, saying that the act by the members of an armed force was "extremely disturbing and reflects on their battle hardiness" and requested that MoD conduct an inquiry into the same. Pointing out that leaving behind an injured man in the chopper along with their weapons during the incident on January 18 was complete violation of the Standard Operating Procedure by the Air Force personnel, the letter by Singh pointed out that that the IAF men had left behind a light machine gun and a pistol while abandoning the chopper.

"In view of the above (episode), I request you to kindly have the matter inquired into and take action deemed fit," Singh said in his two-page letter to the defence secretary. The home ministry has a detailed report on the incident from the Chhattisgarh Police, as well as the CRPF, a home ministry source said.

Six Indian Air Force men, including two commandos, a pilot and a co-pilot, had left behind a state policeman inside the crashed helicopter, which was brought down by Maoist fire in Timilwada area of Sukma district in Chhattisgarh, and rushed to their safety, on January 18.

The services of the Indian Air Force chopper was requisitioned to fly out two policemen injured in an encounter but Maoists brought down the chopper by firing at it - these bullets hit a wireless operator of the state police who was in the chopper and left him badly injured and his condition only deteriorated as help took long to reach him as the six IAF men left him behind in the crashed chopper and rushed to their safety. MHA officials have since pointed out that Maoists may have succeeded in taking control of the abandoned chopper due to the act of the IAF men. The home ministry is separately taking up with Chhattisgarh Police the matter that they failed to properly sanitise the landing area of the chopper.
If IAF doesn't handle this situation properly then it will create a lot of bad blood between them and CRPF.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by John »

SagarAg wrote:Its always HAL fault :(( :(( :(( :cry:
It is HAL that is responsible for IJT, it is pointless to blame IAF or Russians when they have plenty of time and $$ to come up with work around or find alternative suppliers'. Regardless IMO as i have been echoing for couple years it is best to drop it and focus on inducting more Hawks. In the mean time fund a replacement/successor for the Hawk.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

John wrote:It is HAL that is responsible for IJT, it is pointless to blame IAF or Russians when they have plenty of time and $$ to come up with work around or find alternative suppliers'.


Which alternative supplier ???
John wrote:In the mean time fund a replacement/successor for the Hawk.
How much time that will take ???
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2393
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vivek_ahuja »

Sagar G wrote:
Lifafa journo gives out about his credentials in the first para itself, IJT is already a failure :roll:
So you saying its not a failure? Not an utter failure for sure, but not even a teeny weeny one?
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

vivek_ahuja wrote:So you saying its not a failure? Not an utter failure for sure, but not even a teeny weeny one?
Explain to me how can one deem a system under development as a failure or not unless and until the said system has been developed ???
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by John »

Lifafa journo gives out about his credentials in the first para itself, IJT is already a failure
He is quoting IAF as saying IJT is a failure it is not his opinion. What i find even more troubling is IAF continuing to throw money into it, anywhere else and the program would have been scrapped couple years ago.
Sagar G wrote:Which alternative supplier ???
Using a different engine provide: Rolls Royce or Snecma (improved Larzac) for example.
Sagar G wrote: How much time that will take ???
We have plenty of time to develop this since Hawk will be in service till 2030. But it should IMO involve greater participation from our private industries perhaps even a join venture with foreign firm.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

John wrote:He is quoting IAF as saying IJT is a failure it is not his opinion. What i find even more troubling is IAF continuing to throw money into it, anywhere else and the program would have been scrapped couple years ago.
No he isn't quoting any official from IAF saying such thing, IAF is extremely unhappy with the delay but they haven't declared it a failure, "the spin" is a signature of lifafa journos. If IAF wants to scrap it then they should do it immediately but neither are they doing it nor are they being any helpful by whining infront of lifafa journos.
John wrote:Using a different engine: Rolls Royce for example.
Which engine be specific.
John wrote:We have plenty of time to develop this since Hawk will be in service till 2030. But it should IMO involve greater participation from our private industries perhaps even a join venture with foreign firm.
JV with foreign firm for what ???
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9203
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by nachiket »

Is the AL-55 the only problem with the IJT? Details are still unavailable about the reason for the 2011 crash.
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2393
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vivek_ahuja »

Sagar G wrote:
vivek_ahuja wrote:So you saying its not a failure? Not an utter failure for sure, but not even a teeny weeny one?
Explain to me how can one deem a system under development as a failure or not unless and until the said system has been developed ???
Any item from the R&D labs can be put under the perpetual protective bubble of "system under development" to prevent the eventual axing it would receive if presented to the user as a completed design in its current state. This means that if the IJT remains "under development" for the last ten years and the next ten years, no judgment can be passed on it, right? The point is that if a project is progressing at a decent rate then its wrong to pass judgment while in its gestation period. But if its just crawling at turtle pace while its users are waiting impatiently for it, its time to try something else (whether design something else, import or whatever). A classic symptom of a project in dire straits is the repeated "delays" that one hears about. Good project management always builds in time for things to go wrong and defines progress beset by delay. But when your project is defined more by delays than by progress, it has failed. Simple as that.

Allow me to qualify my remarks above by stating that I am not talking only about what the media reports, okay? I know the media has a tendency to sensationalize delays and ignore progress. But even if we look past the media reports, by no means the IJT project comes out shining.

I classify the IJT as a failure on this account. The aircraft itself may very well be fine except for fine-tuning here and there (although a fourth-cousin thrice-removed tells me otherwise).

-Vivek
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Philip »

The IJT which was rolled out in short time,has got stuck in a rut.One was a delay in the engine appearing,but the truth is yet again the disease that afflicts all our Def. PSUs,no accountability whatsoever as to time and cost overruns.Plus,the policy of keeping out the end-user,so that we can in perpetuity develop "technology demonstrators",which are of no or little use on the battlefield.This also perpetuates imports by a disgusted service and the accompanying problems of timely support and spares.The IN has with its own internal naval design bureau and eye on the shipyards,done far better than the IAF or IA.

In the case of the IJT,we seem to be reinventing the wheel.There are so many proven basic trainers,AJTs and IJTs around,both from east and west,which we could've worked out a JV for the same and saved huge time and dev. costs. At the lower tech end,we have been successfully producing Dornier 228s for decades,and are now continuing production both for our use and for RUAG to sell abroad.The same approach could've been worked out with another IJT.This is only because our own HTT basic trainer has also been stillborn,neccessitating import/local production of Pilatus trainers which happily are the best around.

What we need however is an armed version of both the Pilatus-for COIN ops,to deal with Maoists,etc.,and the AJT for close support.Equipped with modern munitions,they would be very cost-effective "bomb trucks",relieving far costlier aircraft from these mundane duties,where the more sophisticated assets could be put to more challenging tasks.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Vivek K »

Corruption goes to the heart of everything. Stories abound of PSU employees selling out to a competitor and working against the interests of the company. Here too it seems that HAL is in favor of a foreign IJT and its golden screwdrivers. Once the IJT is dead the true IJT will emerge. National interest gets lost in these convuleted, corrupt deals.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

good chinese style pic of LCH creeping forward
http://i.imgur.com/n2Ihzwn.jpg
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by John »

Sagar G wrote:Which engine be specific.
We have discussed it before you can look back in archives use of Adour or improved version of Larzec for IJT have been brought up but too late now. Decision to go with AL-55 was puzzling to many including myself: we seemed to taking the risk of untested platform with no benefits of co developments (Shakti engine) and nor where we getting these at a bargain by any means. Based on the article it seems even IAF wasn't too thrilled with HAL's choice. Only people who gained from this deal are rosoboronexport and its agents ($$$$) and Russia's aeronautics industry..
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vina »

Decision to go with AL-55 was puzzling to many including myself: we seemed to taking the risk of untested platform with no benefits of co developments (Shakti engine) and nor where we getting these at a bargain by any means. Based on the article it seems even IAF wasn't too thrilled with HAL's choice. Only people who gained from this deal are rosoboronexport and its agents ($$$$) and Russia's aeronautics industry..
Was it ? I remember it being applauded all around, which makes me believe that it was done by the MoD/IAF Stratejee Folks who put the Russian program and our program program requirements together and decided on an Al-Lie -Ance in the true spirit of Yumm and Yea giri. In our system, someone so low down the chain like HAL has no independence and wherewithal to decide on on Strate-jee calls , even if they make it in the best interests of the program.

It will be done by the MoD Baboons and Mantris and the IAF folks only throwing in jargon like "holistic view" and "synergy" and "strategic partnership" and all that gee whiz stuff which YumBeeYeas would do, but with a heavy layer of Indian Baboon -dom officalese thrown in and made incomprehensible in the process.

The snake oil sold back then was , "same gas flow path as the Al-31, derivative YinJin of Al-31.. very quick to make onree Saar. YechhYeaYell already makes Al-31 onree, Just kato a couple of stages and use same materials, and Yallah, You Yindoos have a 500% Yindigenous YinJin" . Wah! What SynerJee onree, Sir Jee.

Trouble is, however men you put on the job, to make a baby , it takes 9 months ! You may do the kaatna-vaatna and make an In-Jin, but to qualify it and certify it takes that time , and you paid with it in program delays in addition to ponying up the cost ,so that the Russians could get an engine for their trainers. SUCKERS .

And now that you have invested time and money, you cant go back and say put an improved Larzac or Adour or whatever . You are like in a transatlantic flight where you have crossed the turn back point, where the plane has used up so much fuel that the distance to go ahead to to Europe is much shorter than turning back . If you try turning back , you crash in the atlantic. Your only hope is to fly ahead and land in Europe.

So there you are with the IJT. The only hope now is for the Russians to deliver the engine to full specs or you have to scrap the program.

In case you want to change engines now, you are looking at a program that will be 20 years in total in the making. Think of the terrible damage the mangled decision making of the Rodina Lovers have brought on.Someone needs to be held accountable for this. But as always, we will be lost in the maze of backside covering and finger pointing and will never get to kick the A** of the Baboon who made the decision.

If such decision making is done by the Stratejee types in the private sector, you are kicked out on your a**. Now who is going to fire that IAS Baboon ? Can you even do it ? He is a gazetted affsar for Pete's sake.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sagar G »

Don't Want Or Need HAL's HTT-40 Trainer: IAF Chief
"There is no need for it (the HTT-40 turbo trainer project)," IAF chief Air Chief Marshal Norman Browne said in response to a question by me on a series of HAL projects that the IAF is deeply unhappy with.

Confirming to me that the IAF has forwarded a recommendation to the government to shelf HAL's HTT-40 programme, the IAF chief said, "We have the Pilatus PC-7. It's a proven aircraft. The project HAL plans is from scratch. Our indications are that the costs will be too high. There is no need for all this."
I congratulate IAF chief for coming clean about there stand regarding the project so John and vivek ahuja I have nothing more to add but to agree with you that yes IJT is a failure and it must be scrapped as well since "proven aircrafts" are always available in international market. We can now also discuss how LCA and Saras can be replaced by "proven aircrafts" available in international market. After this statement by IAF chief himself HAL must stop all work relating to HTT-40 and focus on creating screw driver manufacturing lines based on ToT from foreign aircraft manufacturers who will provide us with there "proven aircrafts".
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by sum »

^^ Real sad statement from the chief. Means that India will never ever have a homegrown trainer even after 200 years since even the local efforts are outright rejected before start.

Maybe the chief could have asked HAL to continue and they would definitely look at the craft when its ready so that it could replace the PC-7 even if it was after 10 years. But point blank rejecting the craft saying there are other options is a real blow to HAL and any further scope of a local trainer for next 200 years atleast!
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by shiv »

When I look at the Air force side of the debate and the HAL/DRDO side it seems to me that our DPSUs can probably meet Air Force requirements if we setlled for a 10 squadron Air Force of 1960s level technology.

I saw the video posted in the Aero India thread by the Air Force officer speaking of how DPSUs fail the air force, and while he is correct on facts he goes on the defensive to say that "technology keeps changing so tthe Air Force cannot wait forevere and should not be blamed for changing the requirements"

The point is that technology is a moving target only because the benchmark that we (and the IAF) set for technology is being set in the USA and Europe. They set the goals, They are already ahead, and the IAF needs their tech. DPSUs cannot deliver because the minute they import Eurpe and USA move on and change the technology goalpost and IAF is left cursing a HAL that cannot catch up.

It is OK to buy the Rafale. It is OK to buy the PAKFA. But in the long term the IAF is cgoing to have to move on to the 1950s Soviet modeleand the 1960s and 70s Chinese model of lower tech and larger numbers. If the IAF does not do that they will be cursing forever. The goals for how wars are to be fought are set by USA and Europe. But the IAF is in a fix because our politicians do not have the brains to understand that China and the USSR settled for lower tech and cheaper hardware in largernumbers because they were ready to use nukes at short notice.

Indian planners at the political level might actually be blinkered. We want to follow a US/Europe modl of warfighting. But for that we need their tech. we buy and we can' catch up and the IAF whines. We need to setttle for lower techLower specs And a shorter fuse for using nukes if people bugger with us.

Otherwise this idiotic IAF-HAL argumet will go on forever.

Lets face it. That IAF officer is now talking about "modern wars" using smaller numbers and precision weapons. He is not wrong. But guess when it started? Mid 1990s with the Kosovo war. that ws the first war that US and Europe started to practise the art of using PGMs. They perfected that and using steallth in Iraq. Now they are perfecting UAVs and UCAVs. I think the IAF also has to understand the technological history of India - that IAF officer is wrong. It is not just about smartness and brains. It is about trying and failing until you succeed. It shows thatthe IAF knows how to use technology and knows who has that technology but knows little about how that technology came about and how backward India really is. To an extent the IAF has become a Marie Atoinette force who think that cake will be available when bread is not there. They have been given cake by imports while our tech levls have never reached there. The IAF will unfortunately need to be brought down to an Indian level of tech. That willmake them weaker nd less effective - but that will have to be compensated by changes in doctrine like greater numbers, lower tech and a change in nuclear doctrine. But the IAF can't do the latter. The politicians too have to understand the problem the country has.

Unfortnately IAF now has Rafale and PAKFA which will keep them hooked to foreign tech and keep them blind to how low down the the technological pecking order india is.
member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 626
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by member_20067 »

sum wrote:^^ Real sad statement from the chief. Means that India will never ever have a homegrown trainer even after 200 years since even the local efforts are outright rejected before start.

Maybe the chief could have asked HAL to continue and they would definitely look at the craft when its ready so that it could replace the PC-7 even if it was after 10 years. But point blank rejecting the craft saying there are other options is a real blow to HAL and any further scope of a local trainer for next 200 years atleast!
HAL is stretched too far and thin. I think they should consolidate their effort, budget and resource to limited number of projects. Anyway the amount of talent pool is limited. What is the point of getting into every possible platform and then get stuck in a limbo by citing the same excuse of limited resource and budget
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by shiv »

Modern warfare that the good Air Commodore refers to is dependent on the electronics and materials revolution. To aay that the time between the forst aircraft and the fisrt bomb from an aircraft was just 7 years fails to mention that in world war 1 the airforces of Europe were not cursing their own industry for giving them unreliable aircraft. They were stuck in a war and were dying and had to accept whatever they got.

Claiming that the IAF can overhaul a Mig 29 in 7 months so HAL overhauling ALH in 7 months is too long makes me want to ask why the IAF does not go the whole hog and manufacture the MiG 29? But thatwould be impolie. This year I tried to look for the Base Repair Depot stall. Couldn't find one but I have earlier comneted on here that the fairly crude level of tech that the IAF has in its base repair depots is just about the same level that our country has. No more. No less. IAF engineers are smart. DPSU engineers are smart. But the level of tech has little to do with smartmess of engineers. Why the fuk should the IAF be overhauling Mig 29s. What about mother Russia?

It is OK to have a rant about Indians and Indian tech - but I think even the IAF as an institution has failed to grasp where our country is technologically.
Post Reply