Indian Navy chief says ADA let it down on LCA

[INDIAISM]

Actualy they didn't underestimated LCA Program.....to be frank they just overestimated themselves..

 

[KRAIT]

N-T 50 will fly only in 2020 !!
so it will take more time for N FGFA !!!!
in the intervening years N Rafale must be able to fill the gap !!
The Navy must have atleast have a 150-200 fighter fleet for now !!!!
The NATO have classified that N Mig 29k is the advanced fighter in service in whole of asia and africa some say its advanced even than naval rafale !!!
We should buy more mig 29k from russia or produced liscenced version here !!!
With IAF having very less squadrons, it will be hypothetical for now to protect naval assets also in times of war !!!
So the naval AF wing must have sufficient fighters on its own to protect its assets !!!

N-T-50 sounds great...any link..kindly post.
Rafale M is already being considered, hope we buy it.
Rafale M is better than Mig 29K i think but again it all depends on situation.

 

[sancho]

Id been saying ever since I started this whole online forum thing back in 2001.
This is what should have been the LCA

Would have been easy as pie to adapt it for the Navy and even have the Kaveri on it.

Three problems,

1) Indian industry prefers western techs and standards, that's why the RD33 / RD93 was always rejected to be used as a stopgap or why Russians were never considered to be a co-development partner for Kaveri engine, we only used their engine test facilities.

2) Kaveri is a light engine, meant for light to medium class fighters (twin engine), it can't be used in F16 or even heavier class fighters.

3) Size, the Flankers were evaluated but are too big and heavy to be operated from Gorshkov or IAC 1.


Also the main problem for N-LCA development will be, that it is dependent on LCA MK1 development and based on LCA MK2. Both versions are not ready yet and the more they will be delayed, the more N-LCA will be delayed. The decisions of IAF for LCAs FOC in this case are hitting IN and their plans of N-LCA too.

N-T-50 sounds great...any link..kindly post.

No link, just a graphic how it could look like:

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

N-T-50 sounds great...any link..kindly post.
Rafale M is already being considered, hope we buy it.
Rafale M is better than Mig 29K i think.

I read this in a article long ago about the Naval pak fa T 50 will start testing phase in 2020 after the current version is cleared for use !!!
When i find it will post for u or even message the link for u !!!

 

[graphican]

Back to the design table...well if they had this insight of using Russian expertise , we would have 2 squadron by now.
N-LCA will take few years more and we can't have F-35 STVOL. I guess its better to think of N-AMCA or N-FGFA with Russia.

Without first setting the basics right, you will have a very hard time setting up N-MCA. Its just like saying, "Since first million is the hardest to make, lets make the second million first". (These are great words of somebody very senior like sir Mastan Khan).

 

[KRAIT]

Without first setting the basics right, you will have a very hard time setting up N-MCA. Its just like saying, "Since first million is the hardest to make, lets make the second million first". (These are great words of somebody very senior like sir Mastan Khan).

Agree with you.
I was thinking more of N-AMCA parallel to AMCA or couple of years late and prototype by 2018. Scraping N-LCA and buying Rafale M, Mig 29K.
We were thinking of F-35 STVOL and would have got it by same time 2018.
Would this be a plausible scenario???? Give your suggestions.

 

[sancho]

Agree with you.
I was thinking more of N-AMCA parallel to AMCA or couple of years late and prototype by 2018. Scraping N-LCA and buying Rafale M, Mig 29K.
We were thinking of F-35 STVOL and would have got it by same time 2018.
Would this be a plausible scenario???? Give your suggestions.

We weren't thinking about F35B, since IN will get STOBAR carriers not STOVL and in the N-MRCA competitions LM offered mainly F35C, because IN is aiming on CATOBAR carriers in future.
Besides, I think that the F35B will be cancelled! UK changed their orders to the C version, Italy is cutting their order and only their navy still wants the B version, because their carriers can't use the C. And now even the USMC is thinking about not buying the F35B anymore, which leaves no customer that wants or would pay the development costs. For the F35 program, that might be even the best idea, because it reduces much of the costs and there could be a higher focus on the problems of the A and C versions.

 

[nomi007]

navel tejas

why indian are not purchasing rafael m

Rafale A
Technology demonstrator, first flying in 1986.
Rafale D
Dassault used this designation (D for "discret") in the early 1990s to emphasise the new semi-stealthy design features.
Rafale B
Two-seater version for the Armée de l'Air.
Rafale C
Single-seat version for the Armée de l'Air.

Rafale M
Carrier-borne version for the Aéronavale, which entered service in 2002. The Rafale M weighs about 500 kg (1,100 lb) more than the Rafale C. For carrier operations, the M model has a strengthened airframe, longer nose gear leg to provide a more nose-up attitude, larger tailhook between the engines, and a built-in boarding ladder.

Rafale N
Originally called the Rafale BM, was a planned two-seater version for the Aéronavale. Budget constraints and training costs have been cited as grounds for its cancellation.

 

[SQ8]

Three problems,

1) Indian industry prefers western techs and standards, that's why the RD33 / RD93 was always rejected to be used as a stopgap or why Russians were never considered to be a co-development partner for Kaveri engine, we only used their engine test facilities.

2) Kaveri is a light engine, meant for light to medium class fighters (twin engine), it can't be used in F16 or even heavier class fighters.

3) Size, the Flankers were evaluated but are too big and heavy to be operated from Gorshkov or IAC 1.


Also the main problem for N-LCA development will be, that it is dependent on LCA MK1 development and based on LCA MK2. Both versions are not ready yet and the more they will be delayed, the more N-LCA will be delayed. The decisions of IAF for LCAs FOC in this case are hitting IN and their plans of N-LCA too.

1) Is not a problem.. you could request a different engine. If the IAF is not satisfied with Russian tech then why did it agree on the MKI using Saturn engines? After all, it forms a large part of your combat fleet?
Nor did the IAF object on the RD-33 in its upgrades either.. I think the issue has more to do with diversification rather than anything else.

2) The S-54/55 family were light fighters, with weight class matching the LCA(which the Kaveri has also failed to power).
Using a "light" Al-31 variant.. or even a SNCEMA engine would have allowed the IAF to have a light interceptor with naval capability. The current LCA mk1 weighs in at 9000 kg loaded(reportedly).. something based on the S-54 would have gotten to a max of 10000kg loaded and that too on the naval variant.

3). The S-56 series is not a flanker.. nor is it too heavy to be operated from Gorshkov or the IAC.
The max loaded weight is less than the weight of the Mig-29K empty.

 

[SQ8]

Now how difficult would it have been to adapt this design as the Indian LCA..and for it to be adopted by the Navy?

 

[Killswitch]

Hey oscar, loved the vid!

TY!

 

[Jon Snow]

Well the ADA and HAL have let the AF down as well - the LSP 7 and 8 which were supposed to be handed over to the AF last year for user trials havent even flown yet - I think we wont see more than 120 LCA (40mk1 have already been ordered and we will order 83 mk2).

 

[sancho]

1) Is not a problem.. you could request a different engine. If the IAF is not satisfied with Russian tech then why did it agree on the MKI using Saturn engines? After all, it forms a large part of your combat fleet?
Nor did the IAF object on the RD-33 in its upgrades either.. I think the issue has more to do with diversification rather than anything else.

Because there is no other option, we obviously don't get US F15 engines for the MKIs isn't it? Same goes for RD 33 engines in Mig 29s. That's why we compromised on technical issues and quality, but the indigenous developed arms and techs shouldn't compromise in these fields, that's why Russian engine techs were never considered. They didn't even considered Mikoyan as a consultant in the development of N-LCA and prefered LM or Boeing instead and then chosed EADS, which imo was a mistake, since we are procuring Mig 29Ks and they have a long experience with STOBAR carrier fighters.

2) The S-54/55 family were light fighters, with weight class matching the LCA(which the Kaveri has also failed to power).
Using a "light" Al-31 variant.. or even a SNCEMA engine would have allowed the IAF to have a light interceptor with naval capability. The current LCA mk1 weighs in at 9000 kg loaded(reportedly).. something based on the S-54 would have gotten to a max of 10000kg loaded and that too on the naval variant.

I think you are confusing the lighter trainer version with the S-56 carrier fighter here:

S-55/56, 1999(?) 17.5 meters long
spread 11.7 m
height 5.1 m
wing area 49.2 sq. m. (40 sq. m.)
weight maximum 15000 kgf
normal 11250 kgf
empty 8000 kgf
fuel 4500 kgf
load 3000 kgf
speed max 2100 km/h
speed cruise 1400 km/h
service ceiling 59,000ft
range 510 miles on internal fuel at low level, 1,810 miles at height
distance 4000 km
engine AL-31F 12500 kG. AL-41F1 15500 kG.

Sukhoi S-54 / S-55 / S-56 Family

As I said, it's much more comparable to an F16 or J10, than to a light class fighter like N-LCA.

3). The S-56 series is not a flanker.. nor is it too heavy to be operated from Gorshkov or the IAC.
The max loaded weight is less than the weight of the Mig-29K empty.

Of course not, it's a scaled down version and I just meant that IN evaluated Flankers for these carriers.

Now how difficult would it have been to adapt this design as the Indian LCA..and for it to be adopted by the Navy?

It's not about difficult or not, but that IN wanted an indigenously developed fighter, not a foreign one adapted to their needs. The whole idea behind N-LCA is not to get a capable fighter, but to boost indigenous defence industry and to earn know how of developing such carrier fighters.

Personally I would have taken Russian, but more importantly Israeli and French co-development partners, but the aim was clear, that it should be an indigenous development and the S-56 didn't fit in here.

 

[Black Widow]

Forget the N LCA - just buy more mig 29k - though get these ones upgraded with Zhuk AE.
We can use the N LCA as a tech demonstrator and to develop technology for Carrier based aircraft which can be used for Naval AMCA.

Good suggestion, But kindly consider the situation. Suppose in war time We lost many MiG29K, There won't be many MiGs to fly from Carrier. Carrier will be useless then.

But if imagine N-LCA is there, Lost MiGs will be replace by N-LCA. And more over N-lCA will provide nececary expertise to build N-AMCA.