Naval Tejas stalled, no flights for 8 months

[Han Patriot]

Navy rejected N-LCA Mk1 pointing out that it can't take off from ramp with full load.
But they continue to fund the LCA project.
LCA Mk2 is almost confirmed, most likely for both AF and Navy.


Maiden ski jump of NP-1, 2014:

So the answer is yes or no? Are they going to use LCA or they are just gonna fund LCA out of GOI pressure?

 

[KapitaanAli]

So the answer is yes or no? Are they going to use LCA or they are just gonna fund LCA out of GOI pressure?

Mk1 is out.
Mk2, you'll get the answer post 2020. If it happens, it'll be inducted only post 2027. IAF will take everything on offer post Mk1A out of necessity even if IN don't.

There's no pressure on IN. Navy likes home made stuff. Can't blame them for wanting full load and being stuck with STOBAR until 2030.

Things are looking gloomy because of Rafale/FA18. That is 57+45 jets already.
Now they're probably feeling like cutting the funding, hence this article.
Too early to say anything. Maybe they feel like the funding can be slow now since the third carrier is a decade away.

 

[randomradio]

Well, as I said to Jix, take that up with Business Standard @
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...-2-s-development-crippled-118012200008_1.html

I'm not the one that said that base was useless 4 months per year.
And I do get it that -"For regular operational flights, we don't need
the facility, we use a regular ol' runway..." but as you said yourself,
it still doesn't fix the 33% loss in flight time for your quasi-fighter
since it -"... is flown only during clear weather.".

Dude, are you being deliberately dumb? No development tests happen in bad weather. Nowhere in the world. The facility was built for operational aircraft, not for LCA's development. And operational aircraft can be used throughout the year.

Yeah well, I never flew for my airforce only civilian planes.
My mil job was very much on the ground and in your face.

Still, I'll admit to great numbers on paper of course such
as 25% gain on payload over MiG 21 but with shorter range
and a yet to be specified ( FOC this year or not ) availability.
Like this : "There is not frozen standard of preparation of LCA except for the IOC." Managing director of HAL T Suvarna Raju
http://indianexpress.com/article/bu...of-lca-thats-where-delays-are-coming-4944113/

No clue what you are trying to say by bringing in the HAL director's words. The Mk1 is yet to get FOC. But the airframe and flight controls are ready. All the aircraft has to do is test some weapons.

Anyway, the LCA's basic range is 1700Km. No different from the JF-17, Mirage-2000 or F-16. By saying the LCA has lower range than the Mig-21, all you are doing is showing off your own poor knowledge in this subject.

I hope an article from Nov. 2017 is not

Just because an article is recent doesn't mean the info is also new. I thought working in the military makes people reason better.

How about actually relying on facts? Like this--
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...-buy-of-83-tejas-fighters-117122100050_1.html
Earlier on Wednesday, the defence minister stated in a written reply in Parliament: “Defence Acquisitions Council (DAC) has cleared acquisition of 83 LCA Mk 1A for IAF, production of which is planned from 2019-20…”

​

And you don't see how two agencies working on potential
aircrafts due years ago today for tomorrow is a problem?

Of course I do. But the aircraft is still relevant. The LCA has been tailor made for a very specific function and this specific function is still relevant for at least another 30 years.

As long as aircraft like Jaguar, Typhoon, F-16, SH, Mig-35, Su-30/35 etc exist, the LCA will remain relevant.

It does not clash with the mission or funding requirements of other aircraft.

That kind of free selection above must have been a joy to run?
I suppose you don't get why the Rafale Modi-forced selection
filled their hearts with glee either?

"Hearts with glee"? "Rafale Modi-forced selection"? How about making sense once in a while?

Nothing was forced. MMRCA started failing. DM Parrikar told Modi that the deal cannot survive and that if IAF wanted Rafale they would have to go through a separate process. So Modi decided to go for 36 aircraft, separate from MMRCA.

Then they canceled MMRCA and created a new process for TE MII. Rafale MII is merely delayed, nothing else.

LCA wasn't forced either.

By the time LCA is where you want it, Thunder will have retired!

100 fighters in and half the fleet doesn't even have an IFR probe, and the other half has no AESA, no advanced EW suite, no sensor fusion. Wow. The JF-17 doesn't even keep up with the Mig-29UPG (solid state internal EW suite with AESA jammers) and M-2000UPG (sensor fusion, advanced EW suite), let alone the LCA. Let's see if the JF-17 actually keeps up with the DARIN III Jaguar first.

By our standards, we are retiring jets that are at JF-17's level, that's Mig-21 Bison and Mig-27UPG, both have the same configuration as the JF-17.

Please stop comparing our fighter fleet with that of the PAF.

That's the difference maybe that Pakistan knows jets do not last
forever no matter how well you treat them.

Have you even bothered to look at their inventory? Stop embarrassing yourself.

Good luck with those high hopes, Tay.

There's no need to hope for the inevitable. The production of LCA has already begun.

 

[hussain0216]

Mk2, you'll get the answer post 2020. If it happens, it'll be inducted only post 2027.

This jet might hit 100 years old before you induct it the rate you guys are going

 

[Fledgingwings]

Tejas looks good but it has been a while for this aircraft to enter active service with considerable numbers of squadrons on the run.particularly in Navy.

 

[randomradio]

@Taygibay
Gentil monsieur,

Always a delight to read those subtle, balanced posts from you as a bemused observer of unfolding vanities on all sides of PDF divides...

But I guess there is only so much one can take... hence the rather long retort in your post... which sadly none will understand or would honestly attempt to....

Human Condition is perhaps product of Humanity itself... Against Nature all this...? Frenchman's great work. As soldier scholar you might have... Camus?

Anyhow, pure delight reading your unique observations... More British than French... it appears.

Regards,

Mangus

It would help if he uses facts once in a while, not always, only once in a while.

 

[Taygibay]

It would help if he uses facts once in a while, not always, only once in a while.

Okay but just this once 'cuz I'm too dumb

Dude, are you being deliberately dumb?
No development tests happen in bad weather.
Nowhere in the world.

or taking off from the CDG in bad weather
or testing strong winds to discover that the Rafale lands
at twice ( 30 vs 15 knots ) the side winds over expected.

http://www.cnn.com/travel/article/plane-airbus-cold-weather-testing/index.html
​

And of course neither Canada nor Russia ever fly in the cold
and you haven't again pulled a random thought out of .... ..!

So sure, sometimes testing is done inside for practicality but still,

All proper aircrafts are tested for and/or in bad weather​

as they are used in such on occasion except maybe in India.

I'll let you drool such statements from now on, my poor man,
and let someone else have fun!

Tay.


P.S. Thanks, M.O.N!
in my best Jamaican accent!

 

[randomradio]

Okay but just this once 'cuz I'm too dumb

​

View attachment 449785

View attachment 449786

View attachment 449787

View attachment 449788

View attachment 449789

or taking off from the CDG in bad weather
or testing strong winds to discover that the Rafale lands
at twice ( 30 vs 15 knots ) the side winds over expected.

http://www.cnn.com/travel/article/plane-airbus-cold-weather-testing/index.html
​

And of course neither Canada nor Russia ever fly in the cold
and you haven't again pulled a random thought out of .... ..!

So sure, sometimes testing is done inside for practicality but still,

All proper aircrafts are tested for and/or in bad weather​

as they are used in such on occasion except maybe in India.

I'll let you drool such statements from now on, my poor man,
and let someone else have fun!

Tay.


P.S. Thanks, M.O.N!
in my best Jamaican accent!

Getting wet isn't bad weather, genius. The aircraft there are just cold and wet.

Google bad weather first.

 

[Blue Marlin]

Halt in testing jeopardises development of Naval Tejas Mark 2

• Business Standard
• 22 Jan 2018

Even as the Indian Air Force version of the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) powers ahead, the naval version of the Tejas has ground to a worrying standstill. Neither of the two Naval LCA prototypes has taken off in eight months. Since the last Naval LCA sortie on May 20, one of the prototypes lies half dismantled in Hindustan Aeronautics, its interiors gaping open. The other stands forgotten on one side of the hangar.

Even as the Indian Air Force (IAF) version of the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) powers ahead, the naval version of the Tejas has ground to a worrying standstill.
Neither of the two Naval LCA prototypes has taken off in eight months.

Since the last Naval LCA sortie on May 20, one of the prototypes lies half dismantled in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), its interiors gaping open. The other stands forgotten on one side of the hangar.

Meanwhile the other 14 Tejas prototypes, which are flight-testing the IAF’s Tejas Mark 1, flew 406 test sorties last year — more flights than any preceding year, except 2013.

Navy chief, Admiral Sunil Lanba, has publicly rejected the Naval Tejas Mark 1 as too heavy to fly combat missions off an aircraft carrier. Instead, he has backed the Naval Tejas Mark 2, which will have a more powerful engine. But, with the Mark 1 effectively grounded, the Mark 2’s development is also crippled, if not actually halted.

That is because many systems essential for the Naval LCA Mark 2, such as the arrestor hook and leading edge vortex controllers (Levcons allow the fighter to land on a carrier deck at a slower speed), are being designed and tested on the Mark 1 prototypes. The Mark 1 is a crucial technology test-bed and data generator for developing the Mark 2.

That would be a serious setback for the navy, which urgently requires the Tejas for its next aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant, which will join the fleet in 2020, says Lanba. He said the Vikrant “is designed to operate the MiG-29K and the LCA.”

The eight-month gap in flighttesting the Naval Tejas has been a major setback for the test programme. At the “shore based test facility” (SBTF) in Goa – a concrete runway-cum-ramp that replicates an aircraft carrier deck — the easterly winter winds and furious west coast monsoon allow aircraft to take-off only in the February-to-June period. It was planned that the Naval Tejas would carry out an “arrested landing” in 2018, using the arrestor cables on the SBTF but, with no preliminary work done over the past eight months, this will now be possible only in February-to-June 2019. That means a project already heavily criticised for delay has just lost another full year.

Asked why HAL — which builds, repairs and operates Tejas prototypes — is going slow on the Naval Tejas, a senior HAL officer says the navy has turned its back on the programme. “We have limited resources and manpower for Tejas flight-testing. The air force has committed to buying 123 Tejas fighters.

The navy, on the other hand, has publicly rejected the Tejas. Why waste resources on the Naval Tejas?” says a top HAL executive.

However, technology development processes should not be linked with production orders, as HAL is doing, says a senior MoD official.

The navy chief insisted last month that he continues backing the Navy LCA. He said the navy has paid ~6 billion towards the Mark 1, ~3 billion for the Mark 2, and would pay more as development continues. “As far as the LCA Navy is concerned, we are committed to indigenisation. We have supported the project and continue to [do so]”, said Lanba.
But merely allocating funds will not energise the Naval Tejas programme, retorts a senior officer in the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which oversees the Tejas programme. “A user service’s intent is evident from what it commits to the project in terms of test pilots, finance, oversight and most importantly moral support,” he says.

The navy has never committed more than three officers to the Tejas LCA. An ADA officer estimates that is one-fifth to one-tenth what the IAF has committed over the years.
Despite its protestations of support, the navy has steadily backed away from the Tejas programme. In March 2016, in the LCA Tejas Empowered Committee in the defence ministry, top admirals first declared the Tejas Mark I inadequate, but committed to supporting theMark 2.

In May 2017, the navy declined to pay its 25 per cent share of the ~12.31 billion cost of enhancing the capacity of the LCA Mark I manufacturing line from 8 to 16 aircraft per year. The IAF is paying its share.

Difficulty is inevitable in translating an air force fighter into a naval, carrier-deck version, says aerospace expert Pushpinder Singh. It involves strengthening the entire aircraft, especially the undercarriage, to withstand the jarring impacts of carrier deck landings, which are often described as “controlled crashes”. This makes naval fighters.

Since the last Naval LCA sortie on May 20, one of the prototypes lies half dismantled in HAL, its interiors gaping open. The other stands forgotten on one side of the hangar

Heavier

Despite the navy’s pusillanimous approach to the Tejas, that fighter remains crucial to the future of carrier deck aviation in India. The Russian MiG-29K has not proved a success and the navy is grappling with the consequences of that purchase. Procurement is under way of 57 multi-role carrier deck fighters, but that will take time and a cheap, light fighter like the Tejas will still be required on future aircraft carriers. “Realising the Tejas Mark 2 will require deeper reserves of fortitude and clarity than the navy, HAL and ADA have displayed so far”, says a senior naval officer.

why is the navy funding the project if its a dead bird?
buy more mig29k's and be done with it.
lets be realistic, the larger carrier in development wont have a catapult, the tech is too complex and will absorb near enough the navies budget. heck when the yanks went to inspect the vikrant under construction they said its about 10 years away from it being fully operational, they were told it would be ready in less than 3 years.

f18s would be better but would india get them only to have a AC with not means of a catapult?
it may sound daft to think this but going with the trend of f*ck up's i wont be surprised if this happens.
so my idead is to wear a belt before their pand fall down. heck russia said they can modify the mig29's to be catapult launched so its a major win.

its hilarious that they came up with an excuse that there's an 8 month windows because of the weather. imagine the thing on a carrier. (sorry boy's you cant fly, its windy)

@Taygibay dont think its coincidence that the best aircraft in the iaf is the mk2...............

 

[dreamer4eva]

To all my Indian homies cop it on the chin. Missing deadline after deadline is not a good look, there could be multiple reasons but looking at macro level, it does not paint a good picture.

Unconscious bias due to anyone's nationality is hard to get rid off, however, if you can't be objective behind of anonymity of online forum, then I reckon its better to focus your energy somewhere else.

@Taygibay, big fan of yours posts as you always talk common sense but I disagree that its bad decision to have this kind of testing facility, rather its better, as user acceptance trials are more real life scenarios.

@randomradio brother, you believe in that bad weather crap, its an excuse to divert attention from real issues. Can't buy this baloney that Goa has bad weather for 8 months of year.

Keep up the good work both of you, PDF is a better place with both of you being part of it..

 

[randomradio]

@randomradio brother, you believe in that bad weather crap, its an excuse to divert attention from real issues. Can't buy this baloney that Goa has bad weather for 8 months of year.

No excuses were ever made for the N-LCA. It sucks, period. The LCA was never built for carrier aviation and the navy didn't know any better, which they accept.

Keep up the good work both of you, PDF is a better place with both of you being part of it..

Cheers.

To all my Indian homies cop it on the chin. Missing deadline after deadline is not a good look, there could be multiple reasons but looking at macro level, it does not paint a good picture.

Don't worry. Something else is cooking in the background. It's going to take the whole world by surprise.

 

[dreamer4eva]

Don't worry. Something else is cooking in the background. It's going to take the whole world by surprise.

Whatever info you have, hope it is correct. I also spoke to someone from Air Force around 6-7 months ago, and that person told me, 54 Rafales are coming, I asked him is it 18 more or 54 more to make it 90. He did not answer, just smiled. He is good friend of mine, that said, I completely understand he can't disclose everything..

 

[Taygibay]

@Taygibay, big fan of yours posts as you always talk common sense but I disagree that its bad decision to have this kind of testing facility, rather its better, as user acceptance trials are more real life scenarios.

Hey there mate, I'd agree wholeheartedly if this was
the idea behind the location but IF the OP is wrong.

If however that base really can't be used for a third
of the year, it doesn't fit a clear weather aircraft
development program as you also understand.

I would have welcomed as easy a rebuke as :
-We have another base for testing during monsoon.
or even : -The off-months are for refit and upgrades.

​

But that's not what happened and I ended up as JIX
predicted answering nonsense such as this gem :
"No development tests happen in bad weather."
which, you'll note, contradicts your well formed
response above.

BTW, I'm in favour of making sure the Tejas reaches
FOC in decent numbers but not on most of the fixes
and certainly not on multiple development routes.
But when I read the mishmash of cross-development
the excellent PariK outlined yesterday, I doubt again.

It's all in the decision making, esp. vs daydreams!


Don't worry, I know many bright logical Indians and
also idiots where I come from ( x x ). One more in
each category as you in the former ETC won't make
me forget either.

Have a great day, Tay.

 

[randomradio]

Whatever info you have, hope it is correct. I also spoke to someone from Air Force around 6-7 months ago, and that person told me, 54 Rafales are coming, I asked him is it 18 more or 54 more to make it 90. He did not answer, just smiled. He is good friend of mine, that said, I completely understand he can't disclose everything..

Your friend was referring to the air chief saying they will exercise the options clause and get 18 more. But IAF is actually interested in 36 more.

But I was talking about something entirely different. For the navy specifically and it is indigenous, not an import.