It's an achievement
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Perhaps but that is also the point I'm making. What's easier—building larger hangars or building scalable platforms?Kakkaji wrote:IIRC, The small size was mandated so that it can fit in the hangars built for the Mig-21
Times have changed.Cosmo_R wrote:Perhaps but that is also the point I'm making. What's easier—building larger hangars or building scalable platforms?Kakkaji wrote:IIRC, The small size was mandated so that it can fit in the hangars built for the Mig-21
If we insist on using the lowest common denominator as the all encompassing constraint, we can't think big.
Anyway, water under the bridge.
rakall wrote:PratikDas wrote:How long have we waited for this?![]()
Salutations to the LCA team. I'm thinking tears will have been shed.
Source: https://twitter.com/jcmenon/status/732508246687158272
15years 4months 13days !!!
We are still focused on PakistanTimes have changed.
Back in the 1980/90s, India was still in the defensive mindset focused on Pakistan.
Bigger than the investment in the a/c?LCA was to be a modern low-cost replacement for its MiG-21s, which were a bulk of the IAF's fleet (some 300-400 of them). It would have been a massive infrastructure upgrade to replace all those MiG-21 hangers/shelters. Try doing that with limited budget of those days.
The IN seems to not want the NLCA Mk2.Besides, there are opportunities to address some of these "scalability" design issues with Mk.2/3 etc. For instance, NLCA Mk.2 dimension is around Mirage-2000 size. ..
I would not confuse Gnat with Maruti/Nano. The latter two are perfect for narrow Indian inner city roads. Remember Hummers in Mogadishu and shameful defeat as they got stuck in lanes. Just sayin.. and sorry to go OTCosmo_R wrote:
The Gnat/Maruti/Nano model may be at the end of it's relevance. Hope so.
Think big.
Definitely!Khalsa wrote:rakall wrote:{quote="PratikDas"}How long have we waited for this?![]()
Salutations to the LCA team. I'm thinking tears will have been shed.
Source: https://twitter.com/jcmenon/status/7325 ... 272{/quote}
15years 4months 13days !!!
I looked at this figure for a long time.
Tears of Joy are flowing down today.
An excellent step forward by the ACM.
Think of it this way- Learn to walk before you run.Cosmo_R wrote:The Gnat/Maruti/Nano model may be at the end of it's relevance. Hope so.
Think big.
Cosmo_R wrote: Perhaps but that is also the point I'm making. What's easier—building larger hangars or building scalable platforms?
If we insist on using the lowest common denominator as the all encompassing constraint, we can't think big.
Anyway, water under the bridge.
The hangar size was not an issue. No hangar is custom made for the Mig-21. The size of the aircraft is dictated by the perceived role. LCAs were supposed to replace Mig-21 in their role. Also, the small size was dictated by the infatuations of the design team with (wait-for-it) the Gnat! No less, than Dr. Kota Hariharan has said this on many occasions.Kakkaji wrote:IIRC, The small size was mandated so that it can fit in the hangars built for the Mig-21
HTT 40 went in for extensive long ground runs in the afternoon. I was expecting to see LUH but no joy there.Kartik wrote:Huge day for all jingos!
By the way, why didn't any of the journos get pics of the HTT-40 that was also apparently parked on the tarmac? Haven't seen it in a long while.
India's Aeronautical Development Agency has made key progress in the development of the long-delayed naval version of the locally designed Light Combat Aircraft (Navy) or LCA(N), after two prototypes successfully undertook 33 sorties from the Indian Navy's (IN's) shore-based testing facility (SBTF) at INS Hansa in the southwestern state of Goa.
Between 27 March and 25 April two prototypes (NP1 & 2) carrying two Russian Vympel R-73 (AA-11 'Archer') air-to-air missiles each had validated 'ski-jump' trials from the SBTF, which replicates an aircraft carrier deck, according to IN sources.
They said both prototypes - designed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) with stronger landing gear than the standard LCA to absorb the additional forces - took flight after rolling 200 m at the facility. This was 100 m less than the 300 m the NP1 prototype rolled before take-off during its earlier test in December 2014.
The trials also successfully tested the 'hot refuelling' capability of the fighters.
Both naval fighter prototypes, along with the follow-on six to eight limited series production platforms, will be powered by General Electric F404-GE-IN20 afterburning turbofan engines, which generate 80-85 kN of thrust.
For induction into service around 2021-22, however, the naval fighter will be fitted with the more powerful General Electric GE-414 engine - which generates 90-96 kN of thrust - to facilitate take-offs and landings and enable the fighter to operate with a 3.5-tonne payload of fuel for extended range and assorted weaponry.
NP1 conducted its maiden test flight in April 2012: over four years behind schedule. Senior IN officials admitted the reason for this was that the naval fighter had for years found itself 'hostage' to the Indian Air Force's (IAF's) Tejas LCA programme.The development of India's locally designed carrier-based fighter has continued to languish due principally to a lack of institutional support from both the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the IN.
Progress has been further hampered by the priority conferred by successive governments on the IAF's Tejas programme, which was initiated in 1983. The Tejas, however, has yet to obtain its final operational clearance (FOC) after a nearly four-year delay.
"The naval LCA is merely an add-on to the IAF programme," Commodore Jaideep Maolankar, a test pilot with the fighter project, said at the 2015 Naval Aviation Seminar in New Delhi. There is also "no synergy" between the Naval Design Bureau and the naval LCA designers, he added.
More recently, however, under the Modi-led government's 'Make in India' initiative, the MoD reaffirmed its commitment to the programme by approving INR36.50 billion (USD544 million) for it.
All Tejas test pilots are serving IAF (& IN) pilots on deputation to ASTE for 2-3yrs.shiv wrote:Would ACM Raha be the first serving IAF Officer to fly the Tejas or are there IAF pilots on deputation to ASTE?
HAS sizes for MiG-21 were an issue as was the amount of basing LCAs would requireindranilroy wrote:The hangar size was not an issue. No hangar is custom made for the Mig-21. The size of the aircraft is dictated by the perceived role. LCAs were supposed to replace Mig-21 in their role. Also, the small size was dictated by the infatuations of the design team with (wait-for-it) the Gnat! No less, than Dr. Kota Hariharan has said this on many occasions.Kakkaji wrote:IIRC, The small size was mandated so that it can fit in the hangars built for the Mig-21
P.S. The last remark was not to flame the debate on whether Gnat size aircrafts have utility or not. As they say, the resemblance is coincidental.
rakall wrote:PratikDas wrote:How long have we waited for this?![]()
Salutations to the LCA team. I'm thinking tears will have been shed.
Source: https://twitter.com/jcmenon/status/732508246687158272
15years 4months 13days !!!
Agreed. All I'm trying to do is get across a couple of things:shiv wrote:
I would not confuse Gnat with Maruti/Nano. The latter two are perfect for narrow Indian inner city roads. Remember Hummers in Mogadishu and shameful defeat as they got stuck in lanes. Just sayin.. and sorry to go OT
Cosmo_R wrote: If the LCA had been a little bigger (extend the hangar canopy), we could have carried a F-414, had more range etc. The MiG 21 was the rear view image.
Each Sqn of LCA will have a fixed number of trainers. It is how it is with other fighters too. The Sqns are equipped to a "Scale" approved earlier.Ramu wrote:He could order a squadron of trainer. Its never too late.
Re. Maolankar, not entirely correct, he had to take a break for a year to do his sea time to get his promotion to Captain from commander (this i know first hand) and again from captain to commodore (indirect info).rakall wrote:All Tejas test pilots are serving IAF (& IN) pilots on deputation to ASTE for 2-3yrs.shiv wrote:Would ACM Raha be the first serving IAF Officer to fly the Tejas or are there IAF pilots on deputation to ASTE?
AirCmde Rohit Verma was a Chief test pilot in 2011 quit service as IAF overlooked him for promotion apparently citing Blr as plum posting.
OTOH, Navy has kept one test pilot (Cmd.Maolonkar) dedicated to LCA-N program for the past 10-11years (while some other test pilots from IN did 3-4yr detachments).. During this period he got his due promotion from Captain to Commodore.
Thanks for the update.. but even in that intent of the IN was clear.. that IN will facilitate the required stuff while allowing him to be dedicated to the LCA-Navy program.. the fact that IN did not use the 1yr sea time as an opportunity to terminate his detachment to ASTE, and instead let him go back to ASTE immediately after the 1yr sea time speaks volumes about IN's commitment to Tejas.. and inturn shows up the rather step motherly treatment that IAF had resorted to during the same period..vcsekhar wrote:Re. Maolankar, not entirely correct, he had to take a break for a year to do his sea time to get his promotion to Captain from commander (this i know first hand) and again from captain to commodore (indirect info).rakall wrote:
All Tejas test pilots are serving IAF (& IN) pilots on deputation to ASTE for 2-3yrs.
AirCmde Rohit Verma was a Chief test pilot in 2011 quit service as IAF overlooked him for promotion apparently citing Blr as plum posting.
OTOH, Navy has kept one test pilot (Cmd.Maolonkar) dedicated to LCA-N program for the past 10-11years (while some other test pilots from IN did 3-4yr detachments).. During this period he got his due promotion from Captain to Commodore.
In the Navy it is essential for all officers to do their sea time at each level to get promoted to the next level. Unfortunately, the pilots all have to get re-certified every time they go for their sea time and take a long break from flying.
This is a problem that exists both in the IAF and the IN.
sad but true.. the only navy where this does not happen is the USN where the air arm is big enough that the aviators that want to only fly do not get forced into the regular sailing positions and they get their promotions.
If one trainer can fly 2 hours a day and each pilot needs 10 hours for conversion then 6 pilots can be trained on one trainer in 1 month and 12 if there are 2 trainers. What will be done with the extra trainers after the first 2-3 months? Better to have extra fighters no?DexterM wrote:I'd asked about this topic earlier as well -- if the initial lot of LCAs contained more trainers (instead of 2/20, let's say 6/20), wouldn't it help jumpstart type conversion?
Trying to understand the induction process for a new type. Any tips on how this is done?
It made sense when IAF used to order piecemeal qty of variety of aircrafts.deejay wrote:Each Sqn of LCA will have a fixed number of trainers. It is how it is with other fighters too. The Sqns are equipped to a "Scale" approved earlier.Ramu wrote:He could order a squadron of trainer. Its never too late.
What with sweeping assumptions?rakall wrote: Thanks for the update.. but even in that intent of the IN was clear.. that IN will facilitate the required stuff while allowing him to be dedicated to the LCA-Navy program.. the fact that IN did not use the 1yr sea time as an opportunity to terminate his detachment to ASTE, and instead let him go back to ASTE immediately after the 1yr sea time speaks volumes about IN's commitment to Tejas.. and inturn shows up the rather step motherly treatment that IAF had resorted to during the same period..
Kartik wrote:Source Indranil ?
While I agree with the remainder of your comment, the bolded part is not true.rohitvats wrote: What with sweeping assumptions?
How much flying opportunities exist for a Naval Aviator in India? If anything, secondment to a program like LCA testing opens up growth opportunities for them. An IAF test pilot is a fighter pilot at the end of the day. Beyond a certain level, his promotion in the IAF will be basis his tenures in a front-line squadron and various staff postings. Unless, we have a dedicated cadre for Test Pilots/dedicated R&D personnel with its own hierarchy up to AVM/AM level.
Not to forget that LCA flight test team at NFTC has been mostly manned by IAF pilots.