HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[Black Widow]

No they aren't, Air Chief Browne just said at Aero India, that ADA/DRDO should develop it, but that it needs to be seen if the result is 5th generation or not. That's the point, IAF don't need it with FGFA as the prime option, but why should they reject a project that is developed FOR them, without them asking for it at this point. If it turns out to be a success, they take it, if not they will reject it like HTT40 and simply stick with FGFA.



Check this:

Indian Navy Has Shown Interest In Advanced MCA Project | ASIAN DEFENCE NEWS


The problem is again, that ADA/DRDO underestimates the required changes needed for a naval 5th gen fighter, especially if it needs to be catapult capable. That's why they develop it for IAF in first place and currently have no intention for a naval version, as stated at AI, while the navy has a real need and would fully commit to it.
The same nonsense like we saw with LCA / N-LCA!




Sadly it don't, since it doesn't have any weaponbays, or weapon pods. The only point that fits with that regard is the complete internal carriage of fuel.




I meant what you said about LCA, beeing semi stealth.

May be you are true, coz IAF has started showing is color.

Earlier IAF was keen for 20 Tonn class fighter, now they have changed it to 25 Tonn Category. Let us see how many changes IAF will do in development period of MACA...


IAF is committed to kill one more project before its birth...

 

[Black Widow]

Sancho, the problem is not DRDO/ADA, The problem is IAF and Political class. These ppl are not freezing requirements. These ppl are changing requirements and will change requirements in development cycle.

@N-AMCA: Let Navy be clear if they want CATOBAR or SATOBAR N-AMCA, now they are asking for SATOBAR after 30% completeion they will ask for CATOBAR.
@IAF AMCA: IAF have added extra 5 tonn (now it will be 25 Tonn) Later they will ask for 20 Tonn..

Indian defence procurement is cause of all evil. Once Supreme court bann arms import (finshed product) then only DRDO/ADA can flourish, else be ready for sabotaged...

Nature of Sabotage (Changing requirements, Making un-realisable requirement, Putting sand in fuel tank, Cutting wires, Crashing planes and so on)

 

[sancho]

Sancho, the problem is not DRDO/ADA, The problem is IAF and Political class. These ppl are not freezing requirements. These ppl are changing requirements and will change requirements in development cycle.

Oh please not that again, why people always trying to find excuses for DRDO/ADA?

The fact is, they are not looking at the needs of our forces, or even of Indias security, but only at their own interests, that's why they switching to developments like AMCA or AURA, whey they could contribute way more if they fix LCA, offer own improvements for Super 30, Rafale and most importantly FGFA. The problem is, their inferiority complex doesn't allow that, because LCA is only a low end fighter, where they already messed up much, MKI and Rafale are foreign fighters and making them better (even if it would be for our forces) doesn't bring them enough credit, while they are involved only to minor parts in FGFA at all.

=> That's why AMCA is so important for them and why they want to prove that they can build something comparable too, no matter what the real need of India is, or how long it might take.

If they want to develop AMCA, then it should be for IN and logically based on design / techs of Rafale and FGFA, to increase commonality (not simply add another type of fighter, radar and engine) and reduce development time. But that is not what they have in mind!

 

[indiatester]

Sancho, the problem is not DRDO/ADA, The problem is IAF and Political class. These ppl are not freezing requirements. These ppl are changing requirements and will change requirements in development cycle.

@N-AMCA: Let Navy be clear if they want CATOBAR or SATOBAR N-AMCA, now they are asking for SATOBAR after 30% completeion they will ask for CATOBAR.
@IAF AMCA: IAF have added extra 5 tonn (now it will be 25 Tonn) Later they will ask for 20 Tonn..

Indian defence procurement is cause of all evil. Once Supreme court bann arms import (finshed product) then only DRDO/ADA can flourish, else be ready for sabotaged...

Nature of Sabotage (Changing requirements, Making un-realisable requirement, Putting sand in fuel tank, Cutting wires, Crashing planes and so on)

Any end user will ask for everything they can think of. It is the supplier/manufacturers responsibility to negotiate and then stick to the agreed contract. You can't really say that DRDO/ADA have held up their end of the bargain

 

[sancho]

Any end user will ask for everything they can think of. It is the supplier/manufacturers responsibility to negotiate and then stick to the agreed contract. You can't really say that DRDO/ADA have held up their end of the bargain

Exactly and still nobody wants to hold them accountable for that and stick to the simple solution, blame politicians and forces!

 

[indiatester]

Exactly and still nobody wants to hold them accountable for that and stick to the simple solution, blame politicians and forces!

All defence manufacturing units should consider the armed forces as their customers and engage them as such. Their products should be competitive and more importantly they should keep commitments.
To promote domestic manufacturing, govt can subsidise local manufacturers so that they have a better opportunity to compete with international players.

Even if you look at our private industry, we as consumers have earlier always cursed the quality of Indian made products, but now we are quite happy because our product quality has increased substantially. When we as civilians demand the best quality items for the best possible price, I'd expect the armed forces to demand the same and more because they are dealing not just with the user experience, but also with their lives and national security.

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

Awesome maneuver by LCA Tejas making a heart at Aero India 2013

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

Oh please not that again, why people always trying to find excuses for DRDO/ADA?

The fact is, they are not looking at the needs of our forces, or even of Indias security, but only at their own interests, that's why they switching to developments like AMCA or AURA, whey they could contribute way more if they fix LCA, offer own improvements for Super 30, Rafale and most importantly FGFA. The problem is, their inferiority complex doesn't allow that, because LCA is only a low end fighter, where they already messed up much, MKI and Rafale are foreign fighters and making them better (even if it would be for our forces) doesn't bring them enough credit, while they are involved only to minor parts in FGFA at all.

=> That's why AMCA is so important for them and why they want to prove that they can build something comparable too, no matter what the real need of India is, or how long it might take.

If they want to develop AMCA, then it should be for IN and logically based on design / techs of Rafale and FGFA, to increase commonality (not simply add another type of fighter, radar and engine) and reduce development time. But that is not what they have in mind!

WHat improvements? Why would russia allow India to upgrade sukhois, FGFA on its own?

 

[subincb]

Awesome maneuver by LCA Tejas making a heart at Aero India 2013

Which day did he do this? I din see the day i went. Would love to see a better video.

 

[Black Widow]

Any end user will ask for everything they can think of. It is the supplier/manufacturers responsibility to negotiate and then stick to the agreed contract. You can't really say that DRDO/ADA have held up their end of the bargain

Do you think so??? Do you think its just client-user relation? Sonny Boy, its financer developer relation. Armed forces and Politicians fund the projects.

If engineers deny, it will be easy task for these maggots (Politicains and corrupt Army) to siphon that money to Swiss Bank.

And who told you these Maggots give un-reaslisable target/requirement to engineers. The first set of requirements are very simple (viable), Engineers invest there skills and mind, in mid course these bastar** start drama. They twist the requirement.

Since Engineers have already invested much resources, they have no other options than continuing work, If they deny the project will be close. and the blame will come to Engineers and these Maggots will get excuse for siphon that money to Swiss Bank.

 

[subincb]

It shows firing for R73 but not full.

 

[indiatester]

Do you think so??? Do you think its just client-user relation? Sonny Boy, its financer developer relation. Armed forces and Politicians fund the projects.

If engineers deny, it will be easy task for these maggots (Politicains and corrupt Army) to siphon that money to Swiss Bank.

And who told you these Maggots give un-reaslisable target/requirement to engineers. The first set of requirements are very simple (viable), Engineers invest there skills and mind, in mid course these bastar** start drama. They twist the requirement.

Since Engineers have already invested much resources, they have no other options than continuing work, If they deny the project will be close. and the blame will come to Engineers and these Maggots will get excuse for siphon that money to Swiss Bank.

The engineers have not built up a great reputation either way. All the delays have been blamed on them and all the missed objectives have been blamed on them.

Projects should not be continued just because so many resources have been invested, but based on what returns we are getting out of them. If any project has outrun its cost or time limits, it has to be reviewed critically and continued only if defended objectively and it has to be coupled with smart restaffing for the project.

With regards to the twisting of requirements from armed forces, the engineers would have been on a much stronger position if they had delivered either on time or a satisfactory product with delays. What I want to bring out is a decent process where people are held accountable for their failures.

DRDO/ADA/HAL have been successful in two aspects.
1) Areas where we have no supply i.e., ballistic missiles and such.
2) Decent products with low cost. Rudra comes to mind here.

We should learn for these successful endeavours and replicate them in other struggling areas. Don't get me wrong, I would like our agencies to be successful too, but we should not fall into the trap of protecting something that is not delivering.

PS: Based on my experiences in industry

 

[sancho]

WHat improvements? Why would russia allow India to upgrade sukhois, FGFA on its own?

Centerline missilebays (at least 4 missiles could be carried there internally), or stealthy weaponpods for MKIs wingstations.
CAS options for Rafale, based on Sudharshan, Helina, or Samho with multi racks, or rocket pods. As I often say, getting the French into a NG missile co-develoment for IA, IN and IAF fighters to replace R73 from all fighters.
The rights to integrate LRDE AESA radar and possibly Kaveri K10 to Mig 29Ks in future, instead of beeing dependent on Russian upgrades later, which will be very costly.

There is so much we can do, to the huge fleet of fighters, that we will have for the next at least 30 years! Once because these smaller modifications are easier and cheaper to develop for us with our current technical capability, but also because in most cases we are the prime operator anyway! Be it Su 30s, Mig 29Ks and even Rafales, there is no other customer in the world that orders such huge numbers than we do and we already produce them under licence, so the next logical step must be, to customize them on our own, according to our requirements as well and not only to get improvements from the original manufacturers.

Russia will induct early version of Pak Fa by 2015/16, the same time we expect our first Super 30s, so only because Russia don't need further developments wrt lower RCS / stealth features for their older Flankers, doesn't mean we don't need them either, because we will operate them for at least till 2030.
Just like Israel is making their own modifications at US aircrafts as well, to make them more capable.

 

[sancho]

All defence manufacturing units should consider the armed forces as their customers and engage them as such. Their products should be competitive and more importantly they should keep commitments.
To promote domestic manufacturing, govt can subsidise local manufacturers so that they have a better opportunity to compete with international players.

Exactly, because the forces will logically only commit themselfs to projects they need and that are capable enough and not only branded "indigenous", while failing in core capabilities.
Currently it is often the case that privat companies are joining foreign partners for competitions, I would prefer if we always use 1 government company and 1 privat industrial partner to join for projects, because that will help to improve our whole industry to get better, not only government OR private companies.
Foreign partners could still be get as consultants, for example:

LCA development:

- Prime developer HAL
- Sub developer TATA
- Foreign partner for design, navalisation (if necessary) Dassault


Avro replacement, under licence production:

- Prime producer NAL
- Sub producer Mahindra
- Foreign manufacturer to provide ToT..., Airbus/Alenia


Project 75 / 75I

- Prime developer Mazogon
- Sub developer Pipavav
- Foreign partner for design, to provide ToT..., DCNS


Self-Propelled-Howitzer

- Prime developer Ordnance Factories Board
- Sub developer Ashok Leyland Defence Systems
- Foreign partner for design, to provide ToT..., KMW


With this approach, the government will still keep control that the forces will get what they required, that ToT and offsets can be maximised and THEY will decide which privat industrial partner is the best for them to help with modern production and management capabilities, not the foreign manufacturer that has it's own interests in mind!

ADA should be an independent agency that supports HAL or NAL at R&D, but should not be the developer in charge for the whole project, since they don't have the experience or knowledge for that either.

DRDO should be focused on side project only, Engine, radar, avionics, instead of getting their nose into everything and they face infront of every camera.

 

[ANPP]

Oh please not that again, why people always trying to find excuses for DRDO/ADA?

The fact is, they are not looking at the needs of our forces, or even of Indias security, but only at their own interests, that's why they switching to developments like AMCA or AURA, whey they could contribute way more if they fix LCA, offer own improvements for Super 30, Rafale and most importantly FGFA. The problem is, their inferiority complex doesn't allow that, because LCA is only a low end fighter, where they already messed up much, MKI and Rafale are foreign fighters and making them better (even if it would be for our forces) doesn't bring them enough credit, while they are involved only to minor parts in FGFA at all.

=> That's why AMCA is so important for them and why they want to prove that they can build something comparable too, no matter what the real need of India is, or how long it might take.

If they want to develop AMCA, then it should be for IN and logically based on design / techs of Rafale and FGFA, to increase commonality (not simply add another type of fighter, radar and engine) and reduce development time. But that is not what they have in mind!

I should not ask that but showing your ignorance towards AMCA, what is the benefit of Rafale in IAF while we already have MKI (very low cost), super MKi & FGFA are nearly on their way.