HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[sancho]

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.

For you it's ignorance, because you look at it with too much indigenous pride and less rationalism. For me it has nothing to do with the origin, but with what is really needed in operational terms for the defence of our country, that's why I am against AMCA in IAF, but for AMCA in IN!

Rafales benefit in IAF is, that it offers technological alternatives from western sources, which makes us operationally less dependent on Russian weapons or techs and are often even more capable and needed for our defence.
In A2A for example, it needs to be seen how capable the Super 30 will be compared to a Rafale F3+ with lower signatures, better passive detection capabilities and better weapons, at lower operational costs. It's future potentials is also higher and without the stealthy modifications that I mentioned earlier, Rafale will take over the prime roles pretty fast, until FGFA and AURA will be fully operational around 2025 or so.

 

[ANPP]

For you it's ignorance, because you look at it with too much indigenous pride and less rationalism. For me it has nothing to do with the origin, but with what is really needed in operational terms for the defence of our country, that's why I am against AMCA in IAF, but for AMCA in IN!

Rafales benefit in IAF is, that it offers technological alternatives from western sources, which makes us operationally less dependent on Russian weapons or techs and are often even more capable and needed for our defence.
In A2A for example, it needs to be seen how capable the Super 30 will be compared to a Rafale F3+ with lower signatures, better passive detection capabilities and better weapons, at lower operational costs. It's future potentials is also higher and without the stealthy modifications that I mentioned earlier, Rafale will take over the prime roles pretty fast, until FGFA and AURA will be fully operational around 2025 or so.

Thats why we support AMCA.dont you

 

[INDIAISM]

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.

In short you are saying that we should follow Israel path to develop our Defence Aviation Industry....

-Indegenious Weapons
-Indegenious Avionics
-Indegenious Engine K10

To some extent i agree with you sir...As it will save alot of $$ in future then building an entire new stealth Fighter jet....Not only that it will also help us in getting similarity in our Fighter jet Fleet to some extent atleast..

 

[Black Widow]

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

What ever u said is correct, there is no doubt. But this is true in a scenario when you have well developed industry. Your argument hold no value in Research and Development. I work in R&D and I have closely seen extension of timeline. and even not all R&D project meet its fate...

Let me correct you here.
1. ALH Dhruv was R&D project.
2. LCH and ALH Rudra are enhancements.

For Dhruv you can't achieve deadlines (Time and Quality), while in second case you most likely meet them.

LCA was R&D project, India had not made 3rd generation fighter (It was jump from 2nd gen to 4th gen). Instead of being pragmatic IAF/Govt tried to spoil the project.

Being Pragmatic: Kaveri is not ready, ok no problem go to GE or EJ, AoA is 2 degree less, Ok induct it we will rectify in next batch, Can't drop LGBs , ok no problem, will do in next batch.



remember Merkava/F16/F111A was not build in one batch. U do a case study of all world class fighters, you will find them evolving, where as IAF/Govt didn't gave that opportunity to LCA.

Great Machines are not Made , They evolve.....

 

[sancho]

In short you are saying that we should follow Israel path to develop our Defence Aviation Industry....

-Indegenious Weapons
-Indegenious Avionics
-Indegenious Engine K10

To some extent i agree with you sir...As it will save alot of $$ in future then building an entire new stealth Fighter jet....Not only that it will also help us in getting similarity in our Fighter jet Fleet to some extent atleast..

At least for IAF and for fighters, because we that will maximise the operational capability of IAF according to their needs and not only according to what the industry wants to develop.

 

[sancho]

LCA was R&D project, India had not made 3rd generation fighter (It was jump from 2nd gen to 4th gen). Instead of being pragmatic IAF/Govt tried to spoil the project.

Neither IAF/Govt decided to such a jump, but the industry did, because they (DRDO mainly) decided to do radar and engine developments alone, without any know how. Just like IAF/Govt didn't said that these techs must be available for LCA from the start, but the industry did!
You are right about beeing pragmatic, but DRDO should have had that in mind!

 

[Black Widow]

Neither IAF/Govt decided to such a jump, but the industry did, because they (DRDO mainly) decided to do radar and engine developments alone, without any know how. Just like IAF/Govt didn't said that these techs must be available for LCA from the start, but the industry did!
You are right about beeing pragmatic, but DRDO should have had that in mind!

O! is it? I don't remember AESA requirement came from DRDO, I don't know if 90KN engine requirement came from DRDO.


As I said earlier, The initial requirement floated (By Corrupt bastar**) were very realisable, They twist it later.

@Engine: I hope you remember why Marut died, It was unavailability of powerful engine, This is why HAL/DRDO decided to go ahead with own engine.


Do you think if Arjuna was not sabotaged, The family would have got millions of dollars (by T90 deals)?? If LCA was not sabotaged/destroyed Rafael would have came into picture... Wait for few years, u will hear The Family getting kickback..

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

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.

, And How do you suggest we get the rights from russia/ france that will allow all that what you have mentioned to be done in India?

Do you think Russia/France will give you the right to make changes to their planes without their consent? For a modification like strengthening of pylon to carry brahmos, we have to go to Russia and here you are dreaming about making bays and concealed weapon pods on our own?

How can you even suggest all this when we only have production license that does not include the right to make future modifications on our own? For every upgrade, you will have to go to the original manufacturer. All that what you suggest can only be done when we have our own planes and that is the reason for supporting LCA and AMCA programmes so that in future we dont have to run to russia or france.

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.

Yes we can do alot with LCA Tejas or any indigenous plane, but not with foreign plane. Production license does not mean you have the right to make modifications on your own. I don't know under what illusion you are living and making such suggestions.

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.

Agian, Production license does not mean you have the right to make modifications on your own.

I think you are smart enough to understand that Israel-US relations are not the same as Indo-russian relations.

Please stop dreaming.

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

 

[Jayanta]

Will India Air Force order moreTejas.....

 

[rockstarIN]

Will India Air Force order for Tejas.....

40 already ordered.

Serial production is already started FYI

 

[Jayanta]

40 already ordered.

Serial production is already started FYI

Those 40 were ordered long back...unfortunately HAL is running 2 years behind in producing them.. LSP-8 was supposed to fly in 2011. My question was....after the performance in Iron Fist...is the IAF going increase the order.

 

[rockstarIN]

Those 40 were ordered long back...unfortunately HAL is running 2 years behind in producing them.. LSP-8 was supposed to fly in 2011. My question was....after the performance in Iron Fist...is the IAF going increase the order.

Firing R-73s and releasing LGBs not enough for IAF it seems.

Anyways the serial production is started and they suppose to give the first jet by this year end (AFAIK). HAL agreed to produce 8 jets per so far.

 

[sancho]

O! is it? I don't remember AESA requirement came from DRDO, I don't know if 90KN engine requirement came from DRDO.

Yes it is! Because neither AESA radar nor a 90kN engine were required by IAF in the begining of the projects, but were needed after more than a decade delay and because ADA/DRDO couln't provide what they promised. Not to mention that AESA is still not a requirement, but DRDO is claiming MK2 would come with an indigenous AESA, while ADA is just talking about MMR, if puls doppler or AESA needs to be seen, according to their officials.
And as I already explained, higher thrust engine was not an IAF requirement, but an IN!

So less promises and big talk by ADA/DRDO and LCA would be in IAF service by now, but IAF should have inducted a squadron of MK1s at least for training pilots yet.

, And How do you suggest we get the rights from russia/ france that will allow all that what you have mentioned to be done in India?

Do you think Russia/France will give you the right to make changes to their planes without their consent? For a modification like strengthening of pylon to carry brahmos, we have to go to Russia and here you are dreaming about making bays and concealed weapon pods on our own?

Who needs rights from Russia or France to develop a external weaponpod? We only would need their approval for core changes at the fighter and even that is not an issue, if it benefits the OEM as well. Do you think France would deny us to make Rafale more capable, especially if we do it with our money and most likely even as a joint development?
And that's the point, if we remain to be dependent on Russian and France for upgrades, we only get what they develop and at high costs. But if we can develop upgraded techs or capabilities on our own, which just needs integration by the OEM later and it would benefit their forces or exports as well, we will benefit way more.

A weapon pod like the Silent Eagle uses for example is just an external payload and has nothing to do with the fighter itself, so we could develop something like that, especially now when we develop Astra for MKI anyway and if it turns out as a success, ask the Russian to integrate on MKI. They even would be interested to get such things for their own Flanker fleet, as an upgrade, that they don't even to fund.

Yeah, I am the dreamer because I want us to develop an external weaponpod, with some stealthy shapings and weapon doors, instead of developing a fully fledged stealth fighter with all the required techs and capabilities and completely indigenously like you guys think.

Those 40 were ordered long back...unfortunately HAL is running 2 years behind in producing them.. LSP-8 was supposed to fly in 2011. My question was....after the performance in Iron Fist...is the IAF going increase the order.

The problem is not the production, but that LCA didn't get final clearances from IAF yet, since the fighter still has some issues. The faster we get the clearences, the faster we can get the MK1 production fully started.
Iron Fist doesn't make a difference, because not the A2G capability is the problem, but the A2A capabilities, with not reaching the requirements in AoA, G limits, speed...yet.

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

Who needs rights from Russia or France to develop a external weaponpod? We only would need their approval for core changes at the fighter and even that is not an issue, if it benefits the OEM as well.

what does that even mean when you say we dont need rights but approval? You dont need any rights to develop a weaponpod, but you need rights to integrate them onto a platform that is developed by them. You need rights to make any aerodynamic changes whether that is strengthening of pylon to carry Brahmos, adding weapon bay or fuel tanks.

And How does it help an OEM if their user is able to make future upgrades on its own without any help from the OEM? What kind of logic is that? Its an obvious loss for them.

And that's the point, if we remain to be dependent on Russian and France for upgrades, we only get what they develop and at high costs.

Naturally, we will always be dependent on Russians/France not just for upgrades but for next gen planes if we dont start investing in our own programes like LCA and AMCA. Atleast now and in the future, we dont have to go to russia for light weight fighters thanks to LCA programe.

They even would be interested to get such things for their own Flanker fleet, as an upgrade, that they don't even to fund.

Ohhh so they will get upgrades developed by India free of cost? great!!