What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good luck with this "holy white elaphant".
hehe good one..

nyways she's maturing fast.Good.

LCA is too important for us.
 
. .
No wonder he got demoted to Opinionator from Think Tank...

Dude, will be better if you post with some substance.. If not for your own respect, atleast for the respect of the forum since you hold an official title here..
 
.
DRDO should go the entire length ensuring LCA is operational.

To all DRDO ppl : "failure is when when u decide to give up". We completely support you in your endeavor. Good Luck :)
 
.
forget the trolls... we need LCA navy to succeed, and we need it to get operational fast.. INS Vikrant should be commissioned by 2016.. They are moving real fast on that one!!!
 
. . .
Most of you ain't worth replying to , all i wanted to say is that this program is a failure , just a matter of ego. India should rather put its energies in making AMCA a success. LCA is an outdated concept and would have no future use in the warfare except from keeping the pilots playing with a stick and some MFDs.
 
.
Most of you ain't worth replying to , all i wanted to say is that this program is a failure , just a matter of ego. India should rather put its energies in making AMCA a success. LCA is an outdated concept and would have no future use in the warfare except from keeping the pilots playing with a stick and some MFDs.

Expect much good reply from an Opinionator. If 'Light' combat air craft is an outdated concept, then why the hell PAF is inducting another light weight fighter JF-17?.

LCA is not a failure, we learned alot and we do not want to do the same mistake again when we stopped manufacturing own jets after Ajeet. We will go ahead no matter whatever happens and the LCAs will fulfill the missions which it is designed to do.
 
.
^Even if LCA is not a true success, still it can serve as a test bed for our upcoming AMCA.
 
.
Expect much good reply from an Opinionator. If 'Light' combat air craft is an outdated concept, then why the hell PAF is inducting another light weight fighter JF-17?.

LCA is not a failure, we learned alot and we do not want to do the same mistake again when we stopped manufacturing own jets after Ajeet. We will go ahead no matter whatever happens and the LCAs will fulfill the missions which it is designed to do.

This part I agree with, as a learning experience the LCA is not a failure. But as a finished product the LCA(Mk1 anyway) is a total flop. And the reasons for this lie with the IAF's inability to come up with a static Air staff requirement for what it wanted.
I posted a comical video on the development of the Bradley IFV.. and the LCA has many paralells with it.

I do feel that the LCA Navy is being shoved down the IN's throat by an apologetic MoD and DRDO(which has no need to be apologetic for what is not its fault).

The services have been trying to shift the blame for problems in the LCA to DRDO(and HAL) but the fact is it is they who are responsible for shifting requirements every other year.
This was DRDO and HAL's first venture in designed an aircraft completely on their own.. to expect them to do it the same timetable with the same efficiency that established companies do(Occasionally) was foolish.
I agree with Aeronaut that the LCA program should not be pursued anymore, the focus should be on AMCA and all resources should be focused there.
 
.
Most of you ain't worth replying to , all i wanted to say is that this program is a failure , just a matter of ego. India should rather put its energies in making AMCA a success. LCA is an outdated concept and would have no future use in the warfare except from keeping the pilots playing with a stick and some MFDs.

I agree with you on AMCA, but unless NCLA is ready we won't have experience for N-AMCA. LCA is potent testbed and machine. 10-12 Squadron of LCA will be good enough for India to defend its border.

LCA type of aircraft (4th and 4++ gen) will gonna serve for 20-25 year more. So saying LCA is useless now is non buyable statement. World is gonna count on 4th gen fighter till 2030. 5th gen fighters are under development, it will take next 10 years to come under production and next 10 years for production.


So in short LCA is very much relevance for both usage and as development platform.
 
.
---------- Post added at 02:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------

[/COLOR]
This part I agree with, as a learning experience the LCA is not a failure. But as a finished product the LCA(Mk1 anyway) is a total flop. And the reasons for this lie with the IAF's inability to come up with a static Air staff requirement for what it wanted.
I posted a comical video on the development of the Bradley IFV.. and the LCA has many paralells with it.

I do feel that the LCA Navy is being shoved down the IN's throat by an apologetic MoD and DRDO(which has no need to be apologetic for what is not its fault).

The services have been trying to shift the blame for problems in the LCA to DRDO(and HAL) but the fact is it is they who are responsible for shifting requirements every other year.
This was DRDO and HAL's first venture in designed an aircraft completely on their own.. to expect them to do it the same timetable with the same efficiency that established companies do(Occasionally) was foolish.
I agree with Aeronaut that the LCA program should not be pursued anymore, the focus should be on AMCA and all resources should be focused there.

We do slip the due dates for LCA, but I totally disagree the notion that it should be scrapped and focus should be on AMCA.

We have the resources to do both LCA as well as AMCA now, which is already in place.

AP&T

There is a need of replacing 100+ Mig-21s, cant wait 20 years more for the same. Despite its problems, LCA has its own +ves in several areas. i.e composites etc.

If you take the timeline as a sole parameter, then F-35 is a biggest failure but do you think they should scrap it and re open F-22 production line..NO they are going back to even the design phase to rectify it and bring back it to shape. We have invested in LCA time and money. And I do not see any difference in technologies when LCA get FOC with any other 4th Gen Fighter.
 
.
---------- Post added at 02:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------

[/COLOR]

We do slip the due dates for LCA, but I totally disagree the notion that it should be scrapped and focus should be on AMCA.

We have the resources to do both LCA as well as AMCA now, which is already in place.

AP&T

There is a need of replacing 100+ Mig-21s, cant wait 20 years more for the same. Despite its problems, LCA has its own +ves in several areas. i.e composites etc.

If you take the timeline as a sole parameter, then F-35 is a biggest failure but do you think they should scrap it and re open F-22 production line..NO they are going back to even the design phase to rectify it and bring back it to shape. We have invested in LCA time and money. And I do not see any difference in technologies when LCA get FOC with any other 4th Gen Fighter.

Ive already stated "occasionally" in my argument for that.
The composites in the LCA are not just its positives, nor are they magic.
They are positives for HAL and DRDO, the manufacturing knowledge.. the avionics knowledge.. that is the + point in the LCA program.

The 100+ mig-21's can be augmented by further MMRCA purchases or MKI purchases.
It a capability that the IAF does not need.
There is no longer a need for a dedicated light interceptor for the IAF.
Just having the capability aganst who? bangladesh? Burma?
The paradigm shift is to multirole.
What those 100+ LCA's are supposed to accomplish in deterrence the IAF's already potent fleet of aircraft in the MKI,the MMRCA,The FGFA and the AMCA will accomplish.
However if the IAF is still adamant about the LCA then it should look into suspending R&D and focus on basic interceptor Mk1's.
Having money to spend is one thing.. just wasting it because you can is another.
 
.
This part I agree with, as a learning experience the LCA is not a failure. But as a finished product the LCA(Mk1 anyway) is a total flop.

My question would be on what bases this conclusion is made, since there is no finished product so far? Let them build MK1 first and provide some propper specs about it, then we can compare and get to conclusions.

Wrt responsibility... When the fighter turns out around 1t heavier than planned, or when the gears of N-LCA are designed too strong and heavy as needed it's ADAs responsibility, when radar and engine developments gets delayed or even failed and can't be finished according to the requirements that, it's DRDOs responsibility. The forces instead are responsible for wanting a fully capable and ready fighter, instead of improving and maturing it after induction into service.
So they all have their shares, but the main responsibility for all the delays clearly lies with ADA and DRDO!

Switching to AMCA is the worst thing we can make, because we learn nothing if we don't find the mistakes of LCA program and correct them. That is only possible if we finish the project and induct it into operational service and not by simply closing our eyes.
LCA was never important for India as a fighter, because it's just aimed to be the low end of the fleet. The importance comes by the fact that it was meant to be the base project of the aero industry and any further upgrade, design, R&D development in future should be based on it. Without finishing it, all this is not available and besides all the time and money we wasted, we would start at the begining again!

Btw, Aeronaut has no idea what he is talking about when he claims LCA would be outdated. When you look at the materials, techs and capabilities or the overall potential, it's more than close to Gripen level. LCA was developed with with a good growth potential in mind and still would have a good future, if it only would be inducted into service and de-linked from all the unnecessary stuff!
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom