IAF in love with 'Swiss Bird', fate of India's own Basic Trainer hangs in balance

[Sergi]

@sancho @sandy_3126
You both are 50% Right and Wrong.

Problem lies with all of them. DRDO, HAL, IAF and MOD. No point in discussing who's more responsible.

Sandy sir - Problem with HAL was and is hardly money. Actual problem was the vision to take initiative. And I am hoping its been solved.

Sancho : MOD babus are real pain in @ss in every file that has to cross them. And reason is RM with weak hearts a d haunted by Bofors. And thats a long tradition not just AK.

IAF being a force so if they want the thing (!) that suits them better one should cut them a little slack. But again its also their mistake they didn't plan and pursue and pressurise their needs. Long term vision is misisng

coordination ,Better Management and removing NOT my f@cking job attitude.

Perfect example being LCA IOC -2
- Saint told DRDO to keep timeline in front of Saraswat. The guy agreed there.
- in 3/4 days Saraswat said publicly that it would not be possible to keep the timeline again !!!
- Saint actually put pressure this time.
- new chief replaced him and said its quite possible.
- and he actually did it.

So question is what was that Saraswat though it wont be possible ??? What was that Chnadar see it as possible !!!

 

[Tshering22]

@sancho @sandy_3126
You both are 50% Right and Wrong.

Problem lies with all of them. DRDO, HAL, IAF and MOD. No point in discussing who's more responsible.

Sandy sir - Problem with HAL was and is hardly money. Actual problem was the vision to take initiative. And I am hoping its been solved.

Sancho : MOD babus are real pain in @ss in every file that has to cross them. And reason is RM with weak hearts a d haunted by Bofors. And thats a long tradition not just AK.

IAF being a force so if they want the thing (!) that suits them better one should cut them a little slack. But again its also their mistake they didn't plan and pursue and pressurise their needs. Long term vision is misisng

coordination ,Better Management and removing NOT my f@cking job attitude.

Perfect example being LCA IOC -2
- Saint told DRDO to keep timeline in front of Saraswat. The guy agreed there.
- in 3/4 days Saraswat said publicly that it would not be possible to keep the timeline again !!!
- Saint actually put pressure this time.
- new chief replaced him and said its quite possible.
- and he actually did it.

So question is what was that Saraswat though it wont be possible ??? What was that Chnadar see it as possible !!!

Bofors is just a ghost they keep. They are actually so inept at working that they cannot move a file without being pleaded a thousand times. That is the reality.

This is what happens when the national defence of the country is placed in the hands of asshat babus.

 

[sancho]

Who is approving HAL's budget? ministry of coal..... It is funny that HAL needs improvements but MoD doesn't. Show me one MoD transaction in last 10 years which has been on time.... One transaction!

You are diverting the issue again. Nobody said that MoD is doing everything right, but approving HALs budget is one thing, what HAL does with the budget is the other and currently HAL is not doing enough in return for the money they get and that needs to be improved!

And who will do this "re-evaluation", MoD?

If HAL is not able to self reflect, admit to failures and deal with them to improve themselfs, of course MoD has to do it at some point. That exactly is the issue we are discussing here, since HAL doesn't reflect their failures in this basic trainer field at all and simply stick with the project without delivering anything. That's where IAF/MoD had and might have to take over, if the training of IAF pilots will be jeopardised even more.

IJT has direct oversight from IAF, apart from that main delay in this project was caused due to IAF's choice of NPO Saturn engine, Not HAL's first choice, which was Larzac 04-20.

IAF might have oversight of the project, but only set up the requirements! The development of the aircraft is HAL responsibility and that includes the selection of engines to fulfill the IAF requirements. Not IAF selected the engine, but HAL, since their earlier choice was not able to meet the IAF requirements. IAF doesn't select any engines, not the Honeywell engine for Jags, Shakti engine for Dhruv or LUH..., just like IAF might set up the requirements for the cockpit design, but doesn't select if the displays should come from HAL, or Samtel for example. So diverting the blame for the engine selection to IAF is moot, only because IAF has the oversight over the general project.

If there are obstacles with production delays, tooling, technology deficit, i will wholeheartedly accept the blame for HAL, but laying your head in the butcher block for IAF and MoD's bumbling decision making skills. thats something i will disagree to throughout.

The production is only one part, but the development is the first step and here HAL is not doing a good job, be it with HTT40, or even IJT. You can't simply blame IAF to set up operational requirements and to not stick with HAL provided although they wasn't able to meet the requirements. If that is your point, we don't need operational requirements at all and simply can force IAF, IA and IN to take whatever was developed by the industry, no matter how capable they are. LCA without a radar, medicore flight performance, IJT and Saras with credible design issues and low performance, Arjun that hardly fits to IA's operational needs...

 

[sancho]

@sancho @sandy_3126
You both are 50% Right and Wrong.

Problem lies with all of them. DRDO, HAL, IAF and MOD. No point in discussing who's more responsible.

Sandy sir - Problem with HAL was and is hardly money. Actual problem was the vision to take initiative. And I am hoping its been solved.

Of course they all have issues, but ignoring the fact that HAL doesn't deliver and put the blame only on IAF and MoD is not correct. The lack of money is just an excuse, but not the reason why HAL was not able to do it's job for such a long time (in the case of basic trainer).

So question is what was that Saraswat though it wont be possible ??? What was that Chnadar see it as possible !!!

That's the point! We have companies that had so much free hand for years, that they started to dream far higher than they actually were able to deliver. LCA is the prime example, but there are much much more and HAL did the same and that is my problem. They didn't delived the promised stuff (basic trainer, LCA, Saras...), but already were dreaming about IMRH, AJT, or like DRDO did, AMCA, AWACS India...
Antony kicked some asses and changed the policy of DRDO for the moment, I hope he or the next DM will follow that way and force DRDO, HAL, ADA... for more accountability, for closer relations to the forces and their real needs!

 

[MilSpec]

You are diverting the issue again. Nobody said that MoD is doing everything right, but approving HALs budget is one thing, what HAL does with the budget is the other and currently HAL is not doing enough in return for the money they get and that needs to be improved!

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) reported a marginal rise of 2.25 per cent in turnover for 2012-13 compared with the previous year. The turnover rose to Rs 14,316 crore for the year ended March 31, 2013 (provisional).the profit before tax for FY 2012-13 stands at Rs 3,471 crore, a growth of 8.4 per cent compared with to Rs 3,200 crore in the previous year.
I.e. Turnover of 2.4 Billion Dollars and a profit of 576 Million Dollars. A company with this profile should be able to get a say in the projects that it deems fit on it's feasability analysis.

If HAL is not able to self reflect, admit to failures and deal with them to improve themselfs, of course MoD has to do it at some point. That exactly is the issue we are discussing here, since HAL doesn't reflect their failures in this basic trainer field at all and simply stick with the project without delivering anything. That's where IAF/MoD had and might have to take over, if the training of IAF pilots will be jeopardised even more.

If IAF has the spine to take on a project they are more than welcome to, I dont think HAL is stopping them.

IAF might have oversight of the project, but only set up the requirements! The development of the aircraft is HAL responsibility and that includes the selection of engines to fulfill the IAF requirements. Not IAF selected the engine, but HAL, since their earlier choice was not able to meet the IAF requirements. IAF doesn't select any engines, not the Honeywell engine for Jags, Shakti engine for Dhruv or LUH..., just like IAF might set up the requirements for the cockpit design, but doesn't select if the displays should come from HAL, or Samtel for example. So diverting the blame for the engine selection to IAF is moot, only because IAF has the oversight over the general project.

I disagree, IAF oversight means: Approval from ASHQ for all tenders for procurement, it was well documented in HAL's proposal that for the additional 2.1KN of thrust, AL55 will incurr delays as the engine itself won't be ready till 2006 along with that it was at that time an unproven engine, which would delay the project. Guess what oversight committee did, they selected the L1 Bid, i.e. lowest cost bid. Apart from that Oversight committee also approves all performance tests for all subsystems.

The production is only one part, but the development is the first step and here HAL is not doing a good job, be it with HTT40, or even IJT. You can't simply blame IAF to set up operational requirements and to not stick with HAL provided although they wasn't able to meet the requirements. If that is your point, we don't need operational requirements at all and simply can force IAF, IA and IN to take whatever was developed by the industry, no matter how capable they are. LCA without a radar, medicore flight performance, IJT and Saras with credible design issues and low performance, Arjun that hardly fits to IA's operational needs...

Lets not mix up things here, LCA has nothing to do with HAL, we have discussed that too the end. DRDO and ADA are a different animal all together. But you did bring up something interesting, ADA was the creation of MoD and IAF, and the result? The most efficient design agency in country? Yes sure HAL has been seeing delays with IJT, what about MKI, ALH, LCH, DARIN III, DARE, bison upgrade, ,litening integration, PSLV sub-sytems. HAL has done more work with LCA Mk2 redisign in last 3 years than what ADA did in a decade.

I dont know about flight performance of LCA to declare it excellent or mediocre, i will leave that to experts.

More we discuss this, i wish tata and reliance get into defence market of India, especially in aviation. Results I bet would be splendid as these private players have been maverick innovators!

Antony kicked some asses and changed the policy of DRDO for the moment, I hope he or the next DM will follow that way and force DRDO, HAL, ADA... for more accountability, for closer relations to the forces and their real needs!

Was that a joke.... i thought you just paid a compliment to a minister who is the highest embodiment of Inaction.

Of course they all have issues, but ignoring the fact that HAL doesn't deliver and put the blame only on IAF and MoD is not correct. The lack of money is just an excuse, but not the reason why HAL was not able to do it's job for such a long time (in the case of basic trainer).

Sancho, Who is responsible for HAL's working's? Is it ministry of Defence or ministry of Coal, or ministy of agriculture?

If HAL succeeds the responsible party will be MoD

If HAL fails the responsible party would be guess who?

 

[Sergi]

Bofors is just a ghost they keep. They are actually so inept at working that they cannot move a file without being pleaded a thousand times. That is the reality.

This is what happens when the national defence of the country is placed in the hands of asshat babus.

Its a ghost agree. But the DMs and PMs are afraid of it cause they have seen it as a end of their political carrer.

Withh Babus its all different level. They just dont want to get caught when their pants are down.
Trust me if the politicsl leadership is capable and willing the babus are the different game. After all they too have to safe their @ss. Nobody come for them. They dont have any party protection like Neta's.

Babu effieceincy is directly proportional to their policital leader aka Minister. Change him and everything changes with it.

 

[MilSpec]

Its a ghost agree. But the DMs and PMs are afraid of it cause they have seen it as a end of their political carrer.

Withh Babus its all different level. They just dont want to get caught when their pants are down.
Trust me if the politicsl leadership is capable and willing the babus are the different game. After all they too have to safe their @ss. Nobody come for them. They dont have any party protection like Neta's.

Babu effieceincy is directly proportional to their policital leader aka Minister. Change him and everything changes with it.

Just look at the defence ministers in last two decades appointed to provide leadership and decision making in MoD:
Sharad pawar, N. Rao, Mulayam Singh Yadav, George Feranadis, P.Mukherjee, Antony..... On what basis do these blokes qualify for minister of Defence position. Wonder if we play such gambles with finance ministry?

 

[Sergi]

Just look at the defence ministers in last two decades appointed to provide leadership and decision making in MoD:
Sharad pawar, N. Rao, Mulayam Singh Yadav, George Feranadis, P.Mukherjee, Antony..... On what basis do these blokes qualify for minister of Defence position. Wonder if we play such gambles with finance ministry?

Indian politics !!!! Ministries are alotted by the political worth and not by qualification.
Still qualification is not a requirement at all !!! Cause the person sitting on that chair has more than enough qualified help. All he need is a dedication and vision for country.
MOD is not that independent as people think it is. Our DMs run to our PMs for every little thing. Its not required by office but its a party requirement.

Requirement of Bofors replacement is floating around decades and its been introduced to every DM on timely basis. Just non of them have the balls to put their hands in. If I remembered correctly before 2006 for 4/5 years the allotted budget wasn't fully spent !!! It would have been less than half of amount we would need now.
Same thing with 777 light howitzers !!! Decision wasn't made before the production line closed. Now if we have to go with it we will have to pay the reopening also. And why !!!! Just because DM feel the need to discuss it with all concerned department just to check he is doing it right !!! Which he could have and should have done after placing order !!! But Tax-payers money is not important to him before his image.

 

[sancho]

I disagree, IAF oversight means: Approval from ASHQ for all tenders for procurement, it was well documented in HAL's proposal that for the additional 2.1KN of thrust, AL55 will incurr delays as the engine itself won't be ready till 2006 along with that it was at that time an unproven engine, which would delay the project.

So finally you admit that it was HAL who proposed and selected the engine, the IAF has only oversight over the whole project and obviously is following HALs recommendations (which actually proves your view that they didn't support HAL to be wrong too), but you keep denying any critizism on HAL, while diverting the blame again on all others, IAF, the Oversight committee...
If you look at what you said above with a bit more unbiased view, don't you have to ask yourself why HAL suggested an engine that is undeveloped and not certified, especially since you said earlier that HAL prefered the other engine?
IF HAL wasn't sure about the Russian engine, they could had remained with the proposal of the other engine and put the responsibility of taking an unproven engine in favour of more thrust on IAF as the last decision maker, but that's not how it was right? HAL thought the Russian engine would be ready and proven far earlier and was ok with it, therefor went on with the proposal of the engine. That decision "of them" is now backfireing on them and they have to take the blame for it.

Lets not mix up things here, LCA has nothing to do with HAL, we have discussed that too the end.

I am not, just pointed out that you can't ignore the operational requirements and simply take anything that the industry provides no matter how bad they are. And btw, HAL having nothing to do with LCA is too simple too, it was HAL that started with the radar developments, which ended nowhere, but of course the main blame for LCA is on DRDO and ADA, as we both agree.

Was that a joke.... i thought you just paid a compliment to a minister who is the highest embodiment of Inaction.

Not at all, the changes of the LCA projects in the last few years are only based on his stronger stand against DRDO and in fact the whole project went much better after he took over too. You can blame him for things for sure, but if he did something right, then it was his stronger stand on ADA and DRDO, I even want more of that and also against HAL! The DM / MoD must take these PSUs accountable for failures and push them harder to the right directions. Giving them freedom to develop what they want how they wanted has provenly turned out to be a major mistake and a lost decade in Indian aero industry development.

Sancho, Who is responsible for HAL's working's?

HAL is responsible for their own work or their own inaction like in the basic trainer development. They are just as DRDO or ADA oversighted by MoD and you just take that to divert the blame. When DRDO and HAL rolls out a new prototype, who gets all the credit? MoD and the DM? No! Everybody hails DRDO and HAL, no matter how small the step was. But when something goes wrong in such a project, who is blamed? MoD and the DM! So you are just doing what most Indians do, but blaming always the others won't help India and won't help HAL either.[/quote]

Indian politics !!!! Ministries are alotted by the political worth and not by qualification.

Nope, it's just the usual way ministries are manned in a democracy! Germany's defence minister is now a woman with no defence background whatsoever and earlier was minister of family affairs. So that's not an Indian phenomenon, nor must it be a bad situation, since the DM never takes decisions on his own accord, but is always advised by senior military personell as well. But sometimes even they turn out to make wrong decisions, in Germany's case for example to develop a combat helicopter without a chin mounted gun, or more recently the Euro Hawk disaster where they didn't even checked if the chosen systems are correct to use the drone in European or even German airspace according the law. The blame at the end is on the DM, no matter in which country, but he isn't always responsible for the failures that happend.

 

[Sergi]

Nope, it's just the usual way ministries are manned in a democracy! Germany's defence minister is now a woman with no defence background whatsoever and earlier was minister of family affairs. So that's not an Indian phenomenon, nor must it be a bad situation, since the DM never takes decisions on his own accord, but is always advised by senior military personell as well. But sometimes even they turn out to make wrong decisions, in Germany's case for example to develop a combat helicopter without a chin mounted gun, or more recently the Euro Hawk disaster where they didn't even checked if the chosen systems are correct to use the drone in European or even German airspace according the law. The blame at the end is on the DM, no matter in which country, but he isn't always responsible for the failures that happend.

@sancho , you omitted next 5 lines from my post which has the answer to this. I am not arguing on that. I mean something different
Here

Indian politics !!!! Ministries are alotted by the political worth and not by qualification.
Still qualification is not a requirement at all !!! Cause the person sitting on that chair has more than enough qualified help. All he need is a dedication and vision for country.
MOD is not that independent as people think it is. Our DMs run to our PMs for every little thing. Its not required by office but its a party requirement.

 

[MilSpec]

So finally you admit that it was HAL who proposed and selected the engine, the IAF has only oversight over the whole project and obviously is following HALs recommendations (which actually proves your view that they didn't support HAL to be wrong too), but you keep denying any critizism on HAL, while diverting the blame again on all others, IAF, the Oversight committee...
If you look at what you said above with a bit more unbiased view, don't you have to ask yourself why HAL suggested an engine that is undeveloped and not certified, especially since you said earlier that HAL prefered the other engine?
IF HAL wasn't sure about the Russian engine, they could had remained with the proposal of the other engine and put the responsibility of taking an unproven engine in favour of more thrust on IAF as the last decision maker, but that's not how it was right? HAL thought the Russian engine would be ready and proven far earlier and was ok with it, therefor went on with the proposal of the engine. That decision "of them" is now backfireing on them and they have to take the blame for it.

Wow! Are you aware of how the bid process works for RFI on procurement process? After the RFI on a project proposal is submitted by the vendor. HAL evaluates the proposal and with it's reccomendations forwards it to af staff hq and they approve or disapprove the procurement bids.

I am not, just pointed out that you can't ignore the operational requirements and simply take anything that the industry provides no matter how bad they are. And btw, HAL having nothing to do with LCA is too simple too, it was HAL that started with the radar developments, which ended nowhere, but of course the main blame for LCA is on DRDO and ADA, as we both agree.

Wrong again! LRDE was the MMR radar design agency, HAL was the integrating agency. Thanks to DRDO there was nothing to integrate.

Not at all, the changes of the LCA projects in the last few years are only based on his stronger stand against DRDO and in fact the whole project went much better after he took over too. You can blame him for things for sure, but if he did something right, then it was his stronger stand on ADA and DRDO, I even want more of that and also against HAL! The DM / MoD must take these PSUs accountable for failures and push them harder to the right directions. Giving them freedom to develop what they want how they wanted has provenly turned out to be a major mistake and a lost decade in Indian aero industry development.

Is it so, all developments in tejas are based on his stand in last few years, you do realise he has been the DM for 8 years now! was he sleeping for the rest of his time. And I absolutely agree that all ministries should push thier respective PSU's to absolute max, and along with that also clean up their own act along the way.

HAL is responsible for their own work or their own inaction like in the basic trainer development. They are just as DRDO or ADA oversighted by MoD and you just take that to divert the blame. When DRDO and HAL rolls out a new prototype, who gets all the credit? MoD and the DM? No! Everybody hails DRDO and HAL, no matter how small the step was. But when something goes wrong in such a project, who is blamed? MoD and the DM! So you are just doing what most Indians do, but blaming always the others won't help India and won't help HAL either.

so you are in other word absolving Ministry of Defence for all the failures for workings of HAL, DRDO and other PSU's and holding them responsible for their own workings. So in other words if MoD is not accountable for anything including it's own corruption, then what is the need for it to exist?

Nope, it's just the usual way ministries are manned in a democracy! Germany's defence minister is now a woman with no defence background whatsoever and earlier was minister of family affairs. So that's not an Indian phenomenon, nor must it be a bad situation, since the DM never takes decisions on his own accord, but is always advised by senior military personell as well. But sometimes even they turn out to make wrong decisions, in Germany's case for example to develop a combat helicopter without a chin mounted gun, or more recently the Euro Hawk disaster where they didn't even checked if the chosen systems are correct to use the drone in European or even German airspace according the law. The blame at the end is on the DM, no matter in which country, but he isn't always responsible for the failures that happend.

So minister of defence is not responsible for failures in defence of the country just like minister of power wont be responsible for shortfalls in electricity for the country, or the home minister won't be responsible for lack of law and order in the country. Next time may be we should skip the elections. I would like to see a lalu yadav or mulayam singh yadav as a finance minister. That would be fun!


And when you are so vehemently defending MoD and the Dm, please do explain why hasn't he fired managers from HAL and OFB for under performance and in this case for delays. Or fired IAF/HAL officials for delaying MMRCA, procurement by 6 odd years, or prosecuted the army officials in the TATRA truck scams, or bofors scam, or the recovery vehicle scam? Is this part of MoD's standard operating plan?

 

[sancho]

@sancho , you omitted next 5 lines from my post which has the answer to this. I am not arguing on that. I mean something different
Here

I refered to the Indian politics part, because that is not specific for Indian politics only.

 

[sancho]

Buddy you are so in denial!

I said:

it was HAL who proposed and selected the engine, the IAF has only oversight over the whole project and obviously is following HALs recommendations

You said

HAL evaluates the proposal and with it's reccomendations forwards it to af staff hq

That's exactly the same, but on the one side you blame IAF/MoD for not supporting HAL and here you blame them for taking HALs recomendation seriously and going along with it, because it turned out to be a wrong at the end. You might not like it, but the fact remains that it was HAL and not IAF that has evaluated the engine, therefor it is HALs failure and not IAFs when that is now a major problem in the development of the IJT!

Wrong again! LRDE was the MMR radar design agency, HAL was the integrating agency. Thanks to DRDO there was nothing to integrate.

And again, HAL is not responsible, although it was a joint development.

so you are in other word absolving Ministry of Defence for all the failures for workings of HAL, DRDO and other PSU's and holding them responsible for their own workings. So in other words if MoD is not accountable for anything including it's own corruption, then what is the need for it to exist?

Not at all, but it is not the DM nor MoD that developed the HTT 40 for the last several years and failed, it was HAL!!! Just like it would be MoDs or the DMs failure if the forces would be less capable to defend the country as in the past, because they failed to provide the forces with the necessary arms and techs. The one is the work of HAL, the other the work of MoD and everybody is responsible to his own doing.

And when you are so vehemently defending MoD and the Dm, please do explain why hasn't he fired managers from HAL and OFB for under performance and in this case for delays.

Another of your generalisations. I am not defending them nor him, in fact I often even criticised MoD and him for not taking the heads of the PSUs accountable for the failed developments. But that doesn't mean that they or he did everything wrong!

He did the right thing by opening the defence sector for the privat industry, he did the right thing by making procurements based under the highest offset and ToT requirements around the world, he did the right thing by forcing foreign vendors to team up with Indian partners and, he did the right thing to not fall for the US political power to stick to their restrictions (CISOMA, use of fighters with US engines...), or to buy their fighters, he did the right thing by finally kicking DRDOs A.. for LCA and I really wished he did the same with HAL for the trainers as well.

But that's the difference between your view and mine. I give credit for what was good and I criticise the wrong doings of all the sides equally (for years gave credit and still have high hopes on HALs work in the helicopter field too), while you are blaming everybody except of HAL and even are in denial when it comes to their failures, because you can't look beyond your personal feelings for HAL, even if you also say that it was HAL has chosen the engine.

 

[MilSpec]

Buddy you are so in denial!

I said:........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ven are in denial when it comes to their failures, because you can't look beyond your personal feelings for HAL, even if you also say that it was HAL has chosen the engine.

Let's try this again....

>You are the Boss who approves my procurement tenders (i.e. oversight committee - Air Staff hq/Admin)

>Let me be the guy who evaluates the porposals.

>So I float tenders for an engine, i meet with the sales agency of respective companies, i visit their plant, thier test results and thier PPD documents.

> I come back to my factory and with my team i evalaute both the proposals.

> i submit my findings stating that out of the two interested party first party has engine adequately powered for application and will be ready for integration, with good scores on reliability, maintenance. Cost Higher

> The second party engine has higher rated power by 2.1KN, but the engine is unproven, under development and by my estimate wont be ready untill 2006, in other words this will push the project back significantly. Cost Lower.


You go ahead and select the low cost engine

Resulting verdict is : HAL selected the engine that caused delay.

right?