What's new

Ajai Shukla: Making the Tejas fly

Kloitra

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
4,080
Reaction score
4
Country
India
Location
Canada
I have edited the original article, taking out some unnecessary part.

Ajai Shukla: Making the Tejas fly

Most of Tejas' problems stem from poor production, not from an inadequate design


Ajai Shukla / Dec 11, 2012, 00:24 IST

Ask any of the 20-odd Indian Air Force (IAF) test pilots who have flown the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and they will all swear that it is a great fighter to fly. It handles beautifully, screams along at Mach 1.6 (2,000 kilometres per hour) and fires the full range of air-to-air and air-to-ground weaponry. With 2,000 test flights under its belt, it has already proven that it can fly and fight better than most fighters on the IAF inventory. It is vastly superior to the MiG-21, and is not too far behind the Mirage 2000.

Yet the IAF is cool towards the Tejas. It is desperate for more fighters — against an assessed requirement of 42 fighter squadrons, the IAF has 34 squadrons today, which will fall to 26 in 2017 if the Rafale is not inducted by then. But the IAF chooses to live with this dangerous shortfall rather than inducting the Tejas more quickly.

Why this indifference towards the Tejas, the alert citizen would ask? She might also have noted a parallel: the Indian Army sticks with the decrepit, night-blind Russian T-72 tank rather than embracing the far more capable and modern Arjun. The Tejas and the Arjun have a common problem: they are excellent indigenous designs that are undermined by poor production quality.

Just as the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF), Avadi, mismanaged by the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), causes the army to believe that the Arjun is unreliable; similarly Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), a public sector undertaking under the ministry of defence ( MoD), makes the IAF sceptical about the Tejas.

HAL’s poor production fails to translate the Tejas’ contemporary design into a reliable fighter that takes to the air day after day. Most of Tejas’ problems stem from poor production, not from an inadequate design. But they prevent the fighter from flying, slowing down the flight-test programme and making the IAF believe that the Tejas has serious reliability issues.

None of this gives HAL sleepless nights, since it regards the Tejas as the problem of the Aeronautical Development Agency ( ADA), which oversees the LCA programme. HAL prefers to focus on building foreign aircraft under licence, a mechanical task that it has done for decades with ever-increasing levels of inefficiency. The Sukhoi-30MKI, which was initially bought fully built from Russia for Rs 30 crore per fighter, is now built by HAL (substantially from Russian systems and sub-systems) for well over 10 times that figure. Building expensively suits HAL well; since its profits are a percentage of production costs, higher costs mean higher profit.

HAL’s indigenisation is nominal and restricted mainly to low-tech components. High-tech assemblies and sub-assemblies are simply imported from Russia and knocked together expensively into “HAL-built” fighters. Everyone is happy: HAL makes hefty profits; Russia sells lots of Sukhoi-30 kits; and the IAF would much rather rely on Sukhoi-built assemblies than on HAL’s dodgy manufacture.

With so much money flowing in from assembly line manufacture, HAL is ill inclined to engage in the messy business of setting up an assembly line for the indigenous Tejas. For decades, HAL has obtained production drawings, tools and jigs from abroad, most recently from BAE Systems for manufacturing the Hawk trainer. In building an assembly line for the Tejas, HAL will have nobody to pass the buck to. The ad hoc Tejas assembly line, which HAL set up two years ago to build 40 Tejas Mark I fighters by 2017, has not yet produced its first fighter. Now a foreign consultant will teach HAL to do what it has done for decades.

HAL gets away with its disinterest in the Tejas thanks to its cosy relationship with the MoD. Each year the ministry releases a photo of the HAL chairman handing over a large cardboard dividend cheque to the defence minister, as if A K Antony were being presented the Man of the Match award for some intra-office cricket match. But, in successive photo releases, Mr Antony appears glummer and glummer — and that is probably because the realisation is dawning on him that a technology company’s success is measured not in financials but in technological breakthroughs and user satisfaction. In those departments, HAL is deep in the red.

HAL must work with the ADA to set up the Tejas Mark I assembly line and to churn out the aircraft in numbers. The ADA’s eagerness to develop the Tejas Mark II has resulted in the neglect of the Mark I, which is shaping up as an adequate light fighter for the IAF. The MoD must ensure that the Mark I design is stabilised, it is built in numbers, operated by the IAF and user feedback obtained. Only after that should the ADA design the Mark II with well-considered enhancements. And HAL must be held to high production standards and low production costs.
 
. .
one side it says IAF is cool towards tejas, then it says it doesnt thinks its reliable, production issues..hell, every body knows that cant be the main reason..nutshell, one messed up article!
 
.
You still cant take out the fact that Shukla is a complete numbskull on defense matter whenever it involves Pakistan or China.
There is little realistic threat assessment, just jingoism.

He is not good, neither is this article. But I do agree with him on his assessment of HAL.
 
. .
Sukla, He is proving to be an idiot who has no or half baked knowledge of the subject he is talking about or he is just writing something to fill his monthly quota and pull crowd to his web portal. Look at two contradicting statement he made in his article. A plane with more than 2000 test flights without any mishap is called a poor quality product enable to fly regularly and what about the std. quality checks before plane is handed over to customer.:disagree:

Ask any of the 20-odd Indian Air Force (IAF) test pilots who have flown the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and they will all swear that it is a great fighter to fly. It handles beautifully, screams along at Mach 1.6 (2,000 kilometres per hour) and fires the full range of air-to-air and air-to-ground weaponry. With 2,000 test flights under its belt, it has already proven that it can fly and fight better than most fighters on the IAF inventory. It is vastly superior to the MiG-21, and is not too far behind the Mirage 2000.

HAL’s poor production fails to translate the Tejas’ contemporary design into a reliable fighter that takes to the air day after day. Most of Tejas’ problems stem from poor production, not from an inadequate design.
 
.
Sukla, He is proving to be an idiot who has no or half baked knowledge of the subject he is talking about or he is just writing something to fill his monthly quota and pull crowd to his web portal. Look at two contradicting statement he made in his article. A plane with more than 2000 test flights without any mishap is called a poor quality product enable to fly regularly and what about the std. quality checks before plane is handed over to customer.:disagree:

He means to say that Over the years, one of the main reasons behind the slow progress of Tejastest program has been HALs slow rate of production of LCA LSPs. Test program is totally dependent on the number of planes available for flights. HAL has been very slow in churning out LSPs and busy in other projects like IJT etc.

one side it says IAF is cool towards tejas, then it says it doesnt thinks its reliable, production issues..hell, every body knows that cant be the main reason..nutshell, one messed up article!

I think he means cold.
 
.
An excellent article ....surprising coming from Ajai Shukla.

Any one who has worked with HAL knows what a lousy company it is. No accountability, horrible project/program planning which is never on time, complacent workers with a Very Strong UNION and very dodgy quality.

DGAQA which over looks quality in HAL absolutely hates it. They refuse to clear components after components ...only to be forced by MoD to clear them on time.

HAL board of directors is a parking space for retired babus.
 
.
......If anyone bothers to take a survey among all the direct and indirect stakeholders of HAL ranging from Vendors, customers, inspection agencies......they will be hard pressed to find anyone who has anything good to say about HAL.

Their vendors hate them ...but as HAL have a monopoly over aircraft manufacturing in India, they are forced to service them. Comparison of Indian Aerospace Vendors and Indian Automobile Vendors is a study in contrast.

Boeing is so disgusted with HAL delays in their program that they have gone ahead and installed their own equipment for flight trials rather than delay the trails waiting for HAL to deliver.

All other Indian indigenous vendors to Boeing has designed, qualified, produced and delivered products on time expect HAL :angel:
 
.
he is not a journalist... just an idiot with a pen in his hand, its time he should start writing about kim kardashian and leave responsible stuff to real journalist.

He was a colonel in the armor corps who has fought real wars for India, and personally commanded T-72s. Surely he is better off writing about defense than about kim kardashian?

Everything he has said in this article about HAL is spot on. After having gotten a world class design for a light fighter, they are still figuring out how to manufacture it - this after decades of manufacturing state of the art fighters including the MKI.

In 2001, HAL used to boast about how the Tejas would fly operationally by 2005, and it was the IAF officials who had to urge them to set realistic timelienes (which in their view was 2010). Now we are looking at late 2014 as a possible date for the same.
 
.
You still cant take out the fact that Shukla is a complete numbskull on defense matter whenever it involves Pakistan or China.
There is little realistic threat assessment, just jingoism.

What is jingoistic about this? All I can see are criticisms of our only major aerospace unit. How is that jingoism?
 
.
I wonder too why IAF has not massively deployed LCA 1. Mig 21 are falling off the sky in an ever alarming rate. It's only sensible to deploy LCA 1 if it's good enough. The only conclusion is that either IAF is committing treason in jeopardizing India's security or LCA 1 is so bad that keeping the crashing Mig 21 is a better choice.
 
.
I wonder too why IAF has not massively deployed LCA 1. Mig 21 are falling off the sky in an ever alarming rate. It's only sensible to deploy LCA 1 if it's good enough. The only conclusion is that either IAF is committing treason in jeopardizing India's security or LCA 1 is so bad that keeping the crashing Mig 21 is a better choice.

50 cent propaganda army strikes again :coffee: ....other Indians ...dont feed the Trolls.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom