It's Official :: Sri Lanka rejects Pakistan's JF-17 and shows interest in India's LCA

[Ind4Ever]

Tejas contains some core Israel systems like derby and python missiles. is in not a problem for them, if Egypt has got hands on tejas??

Weapon platforms can be replaced with Russian missiles . And other Israeli equipments too.

I think IAF will get 20 Tejas first later export orders can be met

Besides the composite materials, the JF-17 has everything that is required to match or best Tejas. The fellow has a tendency of parroting things without an iota of fact to them.

Despite Tejas being on trails and jf17 been inducted and operational with PAF Chinese defence analyst position Tejas as best in its class. Even they claim J10C is better than rafale. Tejas has many advantages over JF17. What's more attractive is that Tejas upgrades could take place in wide range for IAF and MK2 could be best option for many smaller nations for their future front line jets. Tejas as Trainer will be more attractive for medium sized nations too. So I feel Tejas export gonna be a success story but sad that our GOI yet to look into these and increase production capacity to 24 or above. 16 is our target as of now very slow low

 

[Abingdonboy]

Tejas contains some core Israel systems like derby and python missiles. is in not a problem for them, if Egypt has got hands on tejas??

Whilst I'm skeptical (to say the least) about any talk of export interest for the LCA. The Israeli content is a non-issue as the Python can be replaced by the R-73E (already intergrated on the LCA) and the Derby with the R-77 (or Astra in the long term). Furthermore, Egypt presents an interesting scenerio because remember they have the Rafale now and with the Rafale coming to India also with a lot of industrial partnerships perhaps the Egyptians are thinking they can get the LCA with some complimentary features/components for their own Rafales (if the AASM is coming for the LCA maybe the DAMOCLES pod can be offered for export with the LCA in place of the LITENING LDP)?

Again, I am VERY skeptical but it would be interesting if HAL/MoD could think along these lines, perhaps marketing the LCA as the Rafale's "little brother" (like how the Mirage 2000 is employed by the FrAF) for all existing (and future) Rafale operators (Egypt, Qatar, Malaysia etc). The Indian market would naturally be the catalyst for this and there is certainly the scope to do this, what is/could be lacking is the vision.

@PARIKRAMA @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @dadeechi @ni8mare @Omega007 @MilSpec

 

[SQ8]

Despite Tejas being on trails and jf17 been inducted and operational with PAF Chinese defence analyst position Tejas as best in its class. Even they claim J10C is better than rafale. Tejas has many advantages over JF17. What's more attractive is that Tejas upgrades could take place in wide range for IAF and MK2 could be best option for many smaller nations for their future front line jets. Tejas as Trainer will be more attractive for medium sized nations too. So I feel Tejas export gonna be a success story but sad that our GOI yet to look into these and increase production capacity to 24 or above. 16 is our target as of now very slow low

When you stated Defence Analyst , then Chinese.. and then posted a parroting argument. I stopped reading.

That being said, the Tejas WOULD have been the best in its class had it been managed properly. Currently its a half baked failed program that in no way is a fault of the design or otherwise; just bad Indian management.

 

[Abingdonboy]

ummmm....How many JF-17's has China inducted?

When you stated Defence Analyst , then Chinese.. and then posted a parroting argument. I stopped reading.

That being said, the Tejas WOULD have been the best in its class had it been managed properly. Currently its a half baked failed program that in no way is a fault of the design or otherwise; just bad Indian management.

I partly agree, the true potential of the LCA had not been realised for a long part but the final result is well beyond what was intially imagined and the IAF has seen to that. Had the IAF not had their rigid (to a fault) ASQRs the LCA's faults would likely never have been fixed. So I think it's unfair to call the LCA a "failure" now, it is being inducted with many of the capabilites of a mature platform from day one.

 

[SQ8]

ummmm....How many JF-17's has China inducted?

China never requested the JF-17 and never wanted it. It was designed around a Pakistan SPECIFIC requirement. So keep your smart arse comments to yourself or I will make sure you understand the idea of trolling.

I partly agree, the true potential of the LCA had not been realised for a long part but the final result is well beyond what was intially imagined and the IAF has seen to that. Had the IAF not had their rigid (to a fault) ASQRs the LCA's faults would likely never have been fixed. So I think it's unfair to call the LCA a "failure" now, it is being inducted with many of the capabilites of a mature platform from day one.

You should have better understanding of aviation in the subcontinent based on your time and supposed knowledge to post that stupid gif, but .. I expect too much.

The Tejas is a failure because it has failed to provide what it was supposed to do so within the original time frame,
it is a failure because it STILL fails to provide 1/3rd of the capability in a reliable fashion even in its current time frame.
It looks to remain a BAD program simply because whatever capabilities that are being asked and added onto it require more and more deviation from set test targets which are already behind their schedule.

 

[HAIDER]

LoL. Tejas Indigenous? A plane that even Indian Airforce did not wanted which under Modi’s “Make in India” is being thrust down their throat. If engines from U.S, HUD and AAM from Israel, sensors and pods from France and Israel, radars licensed production and even design assistance of Dassault France is Indigenious? than I have to say, GOOD PROPAGANDA. Besides, who are you to sanction deals as to share tech? with Sri Lanka on Last Chance Aircraft, Tejas? A tech that is not Indian.

 

[Abingdonboy]

You should have better understanding of aviation in the subcontinent based on your time and supposed knowledge to post that stupid gif, but .. I expect too much.

It was a funny rebuttal by @DesiGuy1403 is all.

The Tejas is a failure because it has failed to provide what it was supposed to do so within the original time frame,
it is a failure because it STILL fails to provide 1/3rd of the capability in a reliable fashion even in its current time frame.
It looks to remain a BAD program simply because whatever capabilities that are being asked and added onto it require more and more deviation from set test targets which are already behind their schedule.

All of these criticisms are time-related and whilst that's a fair point to make it only tells part of the story. The LCA that is to be inducted into the IAF is FAR more capable than was ever planned for in the early 90s and almost every other fighter project is weighed against its capabilities and not its delays (although that is rightly criticised ). Almost every project of recent times has been delayed-Rafale, EFT,F-35, F-22, F-16 etc but that doesn't detract from the final product. In the LCA's case, when it is delivered to the IAF (in a few months) it will have all requiste weapons and subsytems already intergrated along with a trainer version and within 18 months an AESA radar will be added onto it. From day one the LCA will be xceptionally capable relative to its competition.


+ I don't know how you quantify " fails to provide 1/3rd of the capability in a reliable fashion" when the LCA, as I have said, is morw capable than orginally imagined and has had no critical flight safety issues to date.

 

[jetray]

It was a funny rebuttal by @DesiGuy1403 is all.


All of these criticisms are time-related and whilst that's a fair point to make it only tells part of the story. The LCA that is to be inducted into the IAF is FAR more capable than was ever planned for in the early 90s and almost every other fighter project is weighed against its capabilities and not its delays (although that is rightly criticised ). Almost every project of recent times has been delayed-Rafale, EFT,F-35, F-22, F-16 etc but that doesn't detract from the final product. In the LCA's case, when it is delivered to the IAF (in a few months) it will have all requiste weapons and subsytems already intergrated along with a trainer version and within 18 months an AESA radar will be added onto it. From day one the LCA will be xceptionally capable relative to its competition.


+ I don't know how you quantify " fails to provide 1/3rd of the capability in a reliable fashion" when the LCA, as I have said, is morw capable than orginally imagined and has had no critical flight safety issues to date.

Most of the ppl forgot the fact that India is doing economically well only since past decade or so. It was the missile program which got the moolah for development. Isro's cryogenic engine and LCA ran into a lot of funding as well technical issues. But its better late than never, probably for next development projects the learning will be carried on. The recent govt initiative to rope in private partners will certainly make things a lot better.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Most of the ppl forgot the fact that India is doing economically well only since past decade or so. It was the missile program which got the moolah for development. Isro's cryogenic engine and LCA ran into a lot of funding as well technical issues. But its better late than never, probably for next development projects the learning will be carried on. The recent govt initiative to rope in private partners will certainly make things a lot better.

Yup. For (aprox) $2BN USD the ADA have developed an advanced 4th gen fighter with 4 variants (single/double seat AF, single/double seat Navy) and a decent roadmap ahead (Mk.1A and Mk.2) along with all requistie infrastucture to develop, test,certify and produce it in house that had never existed before (NFTC, RCS measuring facilities, lightening test facilities etc etc). It's not something to be scoffed at and the foundations that have been laid will serve India very well in the future.

+ Think about this, the AMCA's intial fund request will be more than has been spent on the entire LCA project thus far.

 

[DesiGuy1403]

Yup. For (aprox) $2BN USD the ADA have developed an advanced 4th gen fighter with 4 variants (single/double seat AF, single/double seat Navy) and a decent roadmap ahead (Mk.1A and Mk.2) along with all requistie infrastucture to develop, test,certify and produce it in house that had never existed before (NFTC, RCS measuring facilities, lightening test facilities etc etc). It's not something to be scoffed at and the foundations that have been laid will serve India very well in the future.

+ Think about this, the AMCA's intial fund request will be more than has been spent on the entire LCA project thus far.

I keep reading "intellectuals" giving their "expert" opinion on Tajas and the only thing they come up as negative is that it is poor project management.

To these "intellectual experts", yes, it was poorly managed.
Question is....So What?

Instead of never having a fighter developed by us, we have it a decade late.
It is better to have something late than never have it at all.

Now, the current scenario is that India is building a whole industrial complex based on these "late" achievements.

The so called "experts" should instead focus on the technical aspects of Tejas and how it impacts it's future, they would have had my genuine respect.

 

[SQ8]

It was a funny rebuttal by @DesiGuy1403 is all.


All of these criticisms are time-related and whilst that's a fair point to make it only tells part of the story. The LCA that is to be inducted into the IAF is FAR more capable than was ever planned for in the early 90s and almost every other fighter project is weighed against its capabilities and not its delays (although that is rightly criticised ). Almost every project of recent times has been delayed-Rafale, EFT,F-35, F-22, F-16 etc but that doesn't detract from the final product. In the LCA's case, when it is delivered to the IAF (in a few months) it will have all requiste weapons and subsytems already intergrated along with a trainer version and within 18 months an AESA radar will be added onto it. From day one the LCA will be xceptionally capable relative to its competition.


+ I don't know how you quantify " fails to provide 1/3rd of the capability in a reliable fashion" when the LCA, as I have said, is morw capable than orginally imagined and has had no critical flight safety issues to date.

None of the projects besides the F-35(also a victim of poor project management like the LCA program) has suffered such horrors of mismanagement as the Tejas. It being far more capable than it was planned for is still not as capable as it should be in its current guise. With the current development history as even 50% of indication of how badly this program is managed, it is still going to be much less useful to the IAF than it was ever supposed to be.

If a program is unable to meet its original goals, its current goals.. and things looking bleak for future goals.. Id quantify it as a failure. Understand that I state this repeatedly, the "failure" is not a critique of the platform nor its planned guises but of the way the program has been handled and its actual impact both on the capability of the IAF and the Indian Aviation Industry in general (Save for the CLAW team).

I keep reading "intellectuals" giving their "expert" opinion on Tajas and the only thing they come up as negative is that it is poor project management.

To these "intellectual experts", yes, it was poorly managed.
Question is....So What?

Instead of never having a fighter developed by us, we have it a decade late.
It is better to have something late than never have it at all.

Now, the current scenario is that India is building a whole industrial complex based on these "late" achievements.

The so called "experts" should instead focus on the technical aspects of Tejas and how it impacts it's future, they would have had my genuine respect.

That bold bit is why many would rather kick you out of such discussions.

As for your respect, you are an utter fool to think it will EVER matter.

 

[Abingdonboy]

it is still going to be much less useful to the IAF than it was ever supposed to be.

This is entirely illogical to say the least.

If a program is unable to meet its original goals, its current goals.. and things looking bleak for future goals.. Id quantify it as a failure.

Well sir, this is utter balanoy. The orginal goals were outlined by the IAF's ASQRs at the time and considering they have changed at least 6 times since the 90s and the IAF will only induct the LCA with it meeting this criteria it is basic sense that the LCA IS meeting current goals and thus far surpassing orginal goals, unless you are trying to imply the requirements have somehow been watered down since the 90s? Considering the ADA had NEVER envisiged a naval variant and that that has now become a reality, to claim that the LCA has not surpassed the orginal goals is being highly disingenious IMO. This element alone would have added years to the LCA's project and moved the goal posts massively so it would be foolish to not factor in these elements when judging the LCA's record.

And how can a project meet future goals? Isn't that the point- they are to be met in the future, how can they have already been met? Already claiming they have failed to meet future goals is a new spin.

Understand that I state this repeatedly, the "failure" is not a critique of the platform nor its planned guises but of the way the program has been handled and its actual impact both on the capability of the IAF and the Indian Aviation Industry in general (Save for the CLAW team).

The entire basis of terming the LCA a "failure" is because it has been, in your terms, "mismanaged" and has been delayed. Honestly though, this is some of the most bizarre logic I have heard to try and justify terming the "Last Chance Aircraft" (as someone so hilariously stated above) as a "failure" and the same warped logic was applied to the Pathankot operation; if a task is accomplished having met all of its intended objectives is it a failure just because some outside observers with no qualifications to comment impose their own entirely arbitary defintion of "success"?

From the outset, what was the goal of the LCA project team? To create an Indian replacement for the MiG-21 and to build the Indian aerospace industry up from nothing. On both counts, here in 2016 one can say the ADA team has been succesful.

Yes, some arbitrary timelines have failed to be met but this is par for the course and considering where India's industrial base was in the early 90s, how starved of funding the project has been and some sanctions thrown in along the way fro good measure the delays are understandable to a large degree. As I have said, the orginal timelines were entirely arbitrary- no one had any idea how much of an uphill task it would be, how much work have to go in. The ADA literally had to create an entire ecosystem around the LCA, this couldn't happen overnight. Before the LCA project the DRDO didn't even have their own test crews, it was only with the LCA project that the NFTC came up along with dozens of other centres/facilities.

The first 2 LCAs are already entering SQN service with the IAF this year, the full SQN will be stood up by the end of 2017, HAL will be churning out 16 LCA/year in 2018, the MK.1A with an AESA radar will be in production by that point (it will be only the second fighter in S.Asia to have an operational AESA radar in service after the IAF's Rafale at that point) and by 2020 HAL will be producing 25 LCA/year with signifcant private sector outsourcing.As such, the orginal goals will be complete- the MiG-21s will be replaced and Indian industry has received a huge boost.

The LCA was groundbreaking in a lot of ways for India and its hard fought lessons will be applied to multiple projects in the future and history will be very kind in retrospect to this landmark project. The AMCA and Aura UCAV are direct benficaries of the LCA project as is the Kaveri (that will be back).


To continue to term the LCA project a "failure" is highly unfair. Some elements of the execution may have been sub-optimal but considering the scope of work (that just kept expanding as time went on) and where India started from these are more than understandable and the project has made up for it in the long term.


If it was easy, everyone would do it.


@Water Car Engineer @PARIKRAMA @scorpionx @MilSpec @SpArK @ni8mare @anant_s @SR-91 @AUSTERLITZ @acetophenol @Nilgiri @dadeechi

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Would hardly class this a failure. It's hilarious how no one harps on Dhruv now, it took just as long, there are several marks of it working on over time, with LCH and LUH branching out of the program. And with the whole industry, including private firms, getting on the LCA program now, it'll prepare India's industry for future programs like AMCA.

 

[SQ8]

This is entirely illogical to say the least.

Well sir, this is utter balanoy. The orginal goals were outlined by the IAF's ASQRs at the time and considering they have changed at least 6 times since the 90s and the IAF will only induct the LCA with it meeting this criteria it is basic sense that the LCA IS meeting current goals and thus far surpassing orginal goals, unless you are trying to imply the requirements have somehow been watered down since the 90s? Considering the ADA had NEVER envisiged a naval variant and that that has now become a reality, to claim that the LCA has not surpassed the orginal goals is being highly disingenious IMO. This element alone would have added years to the LCA's project and moved the goal posts massively so it would be foolish to not factor in these elements when judging the LCA's record.

And how can a project meet future goals? Isn't that the point- they are to be met in the future, how can they have already been met? Already claiming they have failed to meet future goals is a new spin.


The entire basis of terming the LCA a "failure" is because it has been, in your terms, "mismanaged" and has been delayed. Honestly though, this is some of the most bizarre logic I have heard to try and justify terming the "Last Chance Aircraft" (as someone so hilariously stated above) as a "failure" and the same warped logic was applied to the Pathankot operation; if a task is accomplished having met all of its intended objectives is it a failure just because some outside observers with no qualifications to comment impose their own entirely arbitary defintion of "success"?

From the outset, what was the goal of the LCA project team? To create an Indian replacement for the MiG-21 and to build the Indian aerospace industry up from nothing. On both counts, here in 2016 one can say the ADA team has been succesful.

Yes, some arbitrary timelines have failed to be met but this is par for the course and considering where India's industrial base was in the early 90s, how starved of funding the project has been and some sanctions thrown in along the way fro good measure the delays are understandable to a large degree. As I have said, the orginal timelines were entirely arbitrary- no one had any idea how much of an uphill task it would be, how much work have to go in. The ADA literally had to create an entire ecosystem around the LCA, this couldn't happen overnight. Before the LCA project the DRDO didn't even have their own test crews, it was only with the LCA project that the NFTC came up along with dozens of other centres/facilities.

The first 2 LCAs are already entering SQN service with the IAF this year, the full SQN will be stood up by the end of 2017, HAL will be churning out 16 LCA/year in 2018, the MK.1A with an AESA radar will be in production by that point (it will be only the second fighter in S.Asia to have an operational AESA radar in service after the IAF's Rafale at that point) and by 2020 HAL will be producing 25 LCA/year with signifcant private sector outsourcing.As such, the orginal goals will be complete- the MiG-21s will be replaced and Indian industry has received a huge boost.

The LCA was groundbreaking in a lot of ways for India and its hard fought lessons will be applied to multiple projects in the future and history will be very kind in retrospect to this landmark project. The AMCA and Aura UCAV are direct benficaries of the LCA project as is the Kaveri (that will be back).


To continue to term the LCA project a "failure" is highly unfair. Some elements of the execution may have been sub-optimal but considering the scope of work (that just kept expanding as time went on) and where India started from these are more than understandable and the project has made up for it in the long term.


If it was easy, everyone would do it.


@Water Car Engineer @PARIKRAMA @scorpionx @MilSpec @SpArK @ni8mare @anant_s @SR-91 @AUSTERLITZ @acetophenol @Nilgiri @dadeechi

You've already spelled out the basic reason for it being a failure. The goal posts keep moving which the ADA is not able to meet on time as a RECORD by the admission of your own countrymen.

It is baloney that you have(as expected) whitewashed the entire failure to meet even the restated goals as an "uphill" task and yet with all the resources available to the program; since the freezing of the basic design in TD-1 to this day almost 15 years later we still have issues in almost every aspect of the program save weapons integration.

While taking potshots at logic, try looking at your own necks and realize that its been 15 years since that aircraft flew and even with the IAF's own stupid demands from it there was ample time and resources available to catch up. Sure, there was a lot learnt with the program but with the level of outside assistance(the entire CLAW team could have gleaned a lot from LM). With all the hulabulloo surrounding "competition" with China, India has been unable to get a 4th Generation combat aircraft to work properly in 15 years!! Unlike China there is ZERO hindrance to technology post 2001 so please dont state that as some "logical" excuse.

At the end of the day, you learnt processes on how to manufacture composite structures and aircraft design(thank you Dassault!) and avionics integration. That is the success you can beat your chest about. The Tejas, the aircraft.. you cannot.

And oh yeah, call for backup.. you need it. @Horus @Bilal Khan 777 @Quwa

Would hardly class this a failure. It's hilarious how no one harps on Dhruv now, it took just as long, there are several marks of it working on over time, with LCH and LUH branching out of the program. And with the whole industry, including private firms, getting on the LCA program now, it'll prepare India's industry for future programs like AMCA.

Ecuador has a different opinion.

no troll war or flamebait will be tolerated

Tolerated by whom? Remember whose site it is.

 

[Nilgiri]

Ecuador has a different opinion.

And what about Turkey and Israel?