What's new

IAF diluted at least 12 benchmarks for trainer aircraft

sasi

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Oct 18, 2012
Messages
404
Reaction score
0
Retired Air Chief Marshal S P Tyagi, former Indian Air Force(IAF) head, faces a Central Bureau of Investigation chargesheet for allegedly diluting a single specification of the VVIP helicopter that India was buying.
In the Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQR), the helicopter’s service ceiling was lowered from 6,000 to 4,500 metres. This made the AW-101 helicopter eligible and its Anglo-Italian manufacturer,AgustaWestland, bagged the euro 556 million (Rs 4,377 crore) IAF contract for 12 helicopters.
That violation, now under investigation, is dwarfed in the IAF’s purchase of the PilatusPC-7 Mark II basic trainer aircraft (BTA), where at least 12 benchmarks were changed between March and October 2009, including some relating to pilot safety. These allowed the PC-7 Mark II, fielded by Swiss company Pilatus, to qualify and win an IAF order worth $640 million (Rs 3,780 crore) for 75 BTA.
Business Standard is in possession of the documents relating to this case. Asked for comments, the IAF has chosen not to respond.
The documents reveal that upto September 29, 2009, Hindustan AeronauticsLtd (HAL) was indigenously developing 181 BTA for the IAF, dubbed the Hindustan Turbo Trainer–40 (HTT–40). On March 5, 2009, IAF laid down stringent performance benchmarks, dubbed Preliminary Air Staff Qualitative Requirements or PSQR.
These began getting diluted in September 2009, when the ministry of defence (MoD) permitted IAF to import 75 BTAthrough a global tender. Within days, the IAF issued a relaxed ASQR, in a document numbered ASQR 18/09. While the Pilatus PC-7 Mark II would not have met the earlier PSQR formulated for HAL, the new ASQR seem almost tailored for Pilatus.
Among the 12 dilutions Business Standard has identified, the most worrisome is doing away with the requirement for a ‘zero-zero ejection seat’. This allows pilots to eject even from a stationary aircraft on the ground (zero altitude, zero speed). The October 2009 ASQR does not require a zero-zero ejection seat. Sincethe PC-7 Mk II has ‘zero-60’ ejection seats, i.e. the aircraft must be moving at 60 knots (110 kmph), dropping the earlier requirement made it eligible for the IAF contract.
The PSQR of March 2009 required the BTA to have a pressurised cockpit, letting the trainee fly at altitudes above 15-20,000 feet. But theASQR of October 2009 dispensed with this. The PC-7 Mark II has an unpressurised cockpit.
Also diluted was the requirement for good externalvision from the instructor’s rear cockpit, a crucial attribute in a BTA. The PSQR of March 2009 mandated a field of view of ‘minus eight degree vision’ for the rear cockpit. The ASQR of October 2009 dispensed with it, specifying only, “the rear cockpit should be sufficiently raised to allow safe flight instruction”. The PC-7 Mark II,which does not meet the eight-degree specification, became eligible.
‘Glide ratio’ is another important attribute for a light, single-engine aircraft. The glide ratio of 12:1 specified in the March 2009 PSQR meant the trainer could glide, in the event of an engine failure or shutdown, a distance of 12 km for every one km of altitude that it lost. Which would enable a BTA flying at an altitude of five km to glide for 60 km, landing safely at any airport within that distance. But the October 2009 ASQR relaxed the glide-ratio requirement to 10:1. That is precisely the glide-ratio of the Pilatus PC-7 Mark II.
The ASQR of October 2009 also relaxed the requirement for ‘in-flight simulation’. This permits the instructor in the rear cockpit to electronically simulate instrument failures, training the rookie pilot to handle an emergency. The PSQR of March 2009 required this facility; the HTT-40 being developed by HAL also has these. The PC-7 Mark II does not and the relaxation of this condition made it eligible for the IAF tender.
Other relaxations that made the Pilatus trainer eligible include increasing the take-offdistance from 700 to 1,000 metres and reducing maximum speed from 475 kmph to 400 kmph.
On Monday, this newspaper had reported (Indian Air Forceat war with Hindustan Aeronautics; wants to import, not build, a trainer) about a personal letter earlier this month from Air Chief Marshal NA K Browne, the present IAF chief, to Defence Minister A K Antony, asking for HAL’s trainer project to be scrappedand another 106 PC-7 Mark II trainers be imported from Pilatus, a purchase that will benefit the Swiss company by an estimated $800 million (Rs 4,750 crore).
 
Saab gollmal hai Bhia, Desh bhakt koi nai, saab paise ke piche hain :hitwall:
 
Browne¡¯s involvement with the basic trainer dates back several years. From March 2007 to May 2009, he was Deputy Chief of Air Staff (DCAS) atIAF headquarters,handling all acquisitions. Four months after he handed over to Air Marshal N V Tyagi (notto be confusedwith the former IAF chief, S P Tyagi), the IAF issued the ASQR, with the relaxations that benefited Pilatus.
Asked for comments, N VTyagi told Business Standard the PSQR of March2009 set unrealistically high standards for HAL to meet. These were lowered in the October 2009 ASQR because the IAF was going for global procurement.
Lower standards would bring in more vendors and generate competition.
Says Tyagi,"The earlier PSQRs matched the performance of the Embraer Super Tucano,which many IAF officers considered a good trainer. But the IAF didn't believe that HAL could build such a trainer quickly.After a series of HPT-32 crashes (then the IAF¡¯s basictrainer), it was decided in September 2009 to buy 75 basic trainers from the global market. Fresh QRs were framed in order to bring as many vendors as possible into the tender."
The question remains ¡ª whywere exacting standards set for a HAL-built trainer lowered when it came to an international purchase?
IAF diluted al least 12 benchmarks for trainer aircraft | Business Standard
 
Will HaramKhors dilute requirement for LCA? LCH? Arjuna?


No, because HAL/DRDO/ADA don't pay them randi and money..
 
Lets face it guys. Another scam in procurement.
 
Only 14 pc-7 is delivered.Delivery of 75 pc-7 will complete only by 2015.
Follow on order 38 pc-7 will take 2yrs. So atleast order is full for 2017.
Mr.browne retiring in few months form now. So why he is itching for 106 more?
 
Lets face it guys. Another scam in procurement.



Its not only Scam , its treason.. These Bas#####$ are so strict on Desi products. While buying Foreign product they lower the standard.

And they have there agents in PDF as well. I have seen many PDF members defending there Masters..


Now you will know how a General son buy BMW and Audi , and have sex tourism in Pattaya ..
 
Even Procurement of Bae Hawk AJT is a scam , People i spoke to in Aero India , in hush hush manner have told that IAF brought Bae Hawks based on ASR which was first issued in 1984 and is low tech , Just google recent purchase of AJT all over , Hawks have lost contract all over , but only won in india .
 
corruption arises from us , starts when we pay that extra 10 rs to autorikshaw drivers, when we expect some incentive for a work done well , when we look with awe at our corrupt neighbour's audi and do not even give a second glance to a honest school teacher or a public servant for doing a job honestly !

boye ped babool ka to aam kahan se hoye ?
 
The most important thing is that pilots have a trainer aircraft that is meeting their requirements.

This will lead to fewer pilots dying in crashes.

If diluting the INSANE requirements sped things up then so be it.

As for Indian made gear, yes the requirements are high, and the OFB, DRDO, and PSU's have problems meeting them because these organizations are poorly managed and lack the dynamism and drive of their private sector counterparts.


I couldnt care less about the feelings of those at HAL. The pilots come first.

HAL had plenty of time to make the aircraft and choked yet again.
 
Congress corrupted each and every institution in this country. Bofors was just the beginning, If the politician can earn money on defense deals, whats wrong with generals doing the same? When the head is rotten, you cannot blame the body. :cry:

As for Indian made gear, yes the requirements are high, and the OFB, DRDO, and PSU's have problems meeting them because these organizations are poorly managed and lack the dynamism and drive of their private sector counterparts.

Are you joking? You cannot expect a world class system when it is being developed for the first time in the country. Take example of NAVY and learn. You can also learn from ISRO.
 
corruption arises from us , starts when we pay that extra 10 rs to autorikshaw drivers, when we expect some incentive for a work done well , when we look with awe at our corrupt neighbour's audi and do not even give a second glance to a honest school teacher or a public servant for doing a job honestly !

boye ped babool ka to aam kahan se hoye ?


bhai tumhare neighbour ke paas audi hai... wow..

aur tum us se jalte ho ... lol.

baki kuchh samajh main nahi aaya hum imaandar logon ko...
 
The most important thing is that pilots have a trainer aircraft that is meeting their requirements.

This will lead to fewer pilots dying in crashes.

If diluting the INSANE requirements sped things up then so be it.

As for Indian made gear, yes the requirements are high, and the OFB, DRDO, and PSU's have problems meeting them because these organizations are poorly managed and lack the dynamism and drive of their private sector counterparts.


I couldnt care less about the feelings of those at HAL. The pilots come first.

HAL had plenty of time to make the aircraft and choked yet again.



Look at the diluted requirement, those dilution may risk the pilot's life .... HAL was not choked rathet It was unable to deliver Randis and Rupaiyah to Babu.. We all know how things work here..

These low life maggots have destroyed Desi product
 
Congress corrupted each and every institution in this country. Bofors was just the beginning, If the politician can earn money on defense deals, whats wrong with generals doing the same? When the head is rotten, you cannot blame the body. :cry:



Are you joking? You cannot expect a world class system when it is being developed for the first time in the country. Take example of NAVY and learn. You can also learn from ISRO.




Brother Blue, even if it would be world class product the system will reject it. Army is happy to run Blind T72 rather than going for world class Arjuna.. What stopping Army to induct 500+ Arjuna??

Ideally 1200 Arjuna+ 1200 T90 (1:1 ratio of Heavy and light tank)..
 
Back
Top Bottom