What's new

Tejas designers target world class technologies for Mark II fighter

Ensuring National security is job of MoD and safety of pilots is responsibility of IAF. Looks like they failed in their duty as per you.

Not really, because they did their part by ordering the necessary numbers of a modern fighter, but DRDO/ADA failed to provide it!


Your words of 'wisdom' notwithstanding, I would choose the wisdom of Indian's scientific Adviser for choosing to develop an Indian fighter.

LCA would not be less Indian, if it has used proven foreign engines and radars at the begining, it would only be a logical step to keep such an ambitious project (DRDO and ADAs most favourite word) simple and realistic. Indigenous engine and radar developments could had been done at the same time, but added to LCA at later stages, when they turned out to be mature enough. The simple fact that this is exactly what the "Indian's scientific Advisers" today suggest for LCA, makes clear that I am right, we just thought we were smarter back then, then we really were!

Logistics is not ADA responsibility. That is IAF role....looks like IAF failed yet again as per you.

Who is talking about logistics? It's about using available techs and parts to speed up the LCA development, instead of HOPING that LRDE will someday able to provide a radar, or HOPING that GTRE will someday able to provide an engine.

The rest of your post is had no arguments, so no need to reply on them.
 
.
What is incorrect ??? LCA is delayed ??? LCA is wrongly managed ??? LCA handlers over assumed their capacities ???
Why not read Sancho's post and reply to him ??? He can answer better than me.

I'v edited the post. The incorrect part. It came out as irrelevant. However you were off the mark on invention part.. For all practical purposes ADA and HAL did invent a few things. And i replied to you friend, and your rep was good enough for me.
 
.
I'v edited the post. The incorrect part. It came out as irrelevant. However you were off the mark on invention part.. For all practical purposes ADA and HAL did invent a few things. And i replied to you friend, and your rep was good enough for me.

I though you took it otherwise.
Nobody is against LCA project and everyone is eagerly waiting for Mark-2. Hope they keep up the time line this time ( still they pushed the prototype's first fight to late 2015)
 
.
The infamous Prasun's contribution:

Vixen-850e+AESA-MMR.jpg


Skyward+IRST.jpg


250kg+AASM+Hammer.jpg


Cockpit+NG.jpg


TRISHUL: Users Insist On Radical Makeover For Tejas Mk2
 
.
Not really, because they did their part by ordering the necessary numbers of a modern fighter, but DRDO/ADA failed to provide it!

..:lol: then MoD and IAF are bigger fools that you give them credit for. DRDO / ADA is a research agency not a production house.

LCA would not be less Indian, if it has used proven foreign engines and radars at the begining, it would only be a logical step to keep such an ambitious project (DRDO and ADAs most favourite word) simple and realistic. Indigenous engine and radar developments could had been done at the same time, but added to LCA at later stages, when they turned out to be mature enough. The simple fact that this is exactly what the "Indian's scientific Advisers" today suggest for LCA, makes clear that I am right, we just thought we were smarter back then, then we really were!

You are right .....:enjoy: Its a shame DRDO doesn't employ you :cry:. You are Dr. Sigmund Freud and Dr. Hariharan Kota rolled into one :tup:

Who is talking about logistics? It's about using available techs and parts to speed up the LCA development, instead of HOPING that LRDE will someday able to provide a radar, or HOPING that GTRE will someday able to provide an engine.

LRDE job is to do research and develop a radar. GTRE job is to do research and develop a engine. ADA's job is to evaluate best options and move forward and develop an aircraft. R&D is all about HOPE. That is why Thomas Edision continued to try to build a bulb even after 1000 failurs ....even after 1999 failurs. He HOPED he would someday get it right. I guess they were not as smart as you as to know when to give up :rolleyes:
 
.
DRDO / ADA is a research agency not a production house.

And since LCA as a fighter, the MMR and Kaveri engine were developed by them, they obviously are responsible for anykind of delay and even more for the failures and not MoD/IAF, which are just the operators!
 
.
And since LCA as a fighter, the MMR and Kaveri engine were developed by them, they obviously are responsible for anykind of delay and even more for the failures and not MoD/IAF, which are just the operators!

Of course DRDO is responsible for any failure ....they are mandated to try, try again if they fail...then try some more till they succeed. Where is the confusion here ?

MoD is mandated to defend the nation by whatever means necessary. Let them do this and not make excuses.

IAF is mandated to defend the airspace by whatever means necessary. Let them do this and not make excuses either.
 
.
And since LCA as a fighter, the MMR and Kaveri engine were developed by them, they obviously are responsible for anykind of delay and even more for the failures and not MoD/IAF, which are just the operators!

To kya kare ab? Phansi laga le! Sancho ji you write excellent invormative posts and i look forward to them. But optimism is not your forte . No offence :)
There are times when being ambitious is the only way ahead. If they were conservative, their techs, on which they were workin, would already be a couple of gen behind. That also will give you reasons to complaint.

I'll blast them for their mismanagement rather than being a little too ambitious in their planned R&D. You may of course differ.
 
. . .
To kya kare ab? Phansi laga le! Sancho ji you write excellent invormative posts and i look forward to them. But optimism is not your forte . No offence :)

No problem, you are not the first one that thought so because of my criticism of the LCA developers, but it's actually the opposite. I am very optimistic about the fighter and want to see it in operational service as soon as possible. That's why I am so disappointed about the constant delays a the silly way this so important project for India is handled. And I am more than fed up about their denial how they keep on pretending like they did everything right and why not a single decision maker of ADA or DRDO was taken responsible for the mismanagement!
In any normal company, a manager that would have messed up a project like this, would have been kicked big times, but here they keep siting in their chairs and we wonder why there is so lees improvement in the project. :hitwall:

There are times when being ambitious is the only way ahead. If they were conservative, their techs, on which they were workin, would already be a couple of gen behind. That also will give you reasons to complaint.

True, but only if you have no other options and only to a certain extend! We had plenty of options to, but we didn't used them and chose the most difficult one.

- developing such a fighter for the first time was indeed ambitious, but still within our capabilities

- developing the fighter and the radar alone, was overestimation

- developing the fighter, the radar and the engine alone was simply insane!!!


And what strikes me is, that only our brave pilots, the sucurity of our nation and the tax payer have to pay the price, while those who are responsible for this kind of insiane planning didn't at all.
Btw, we are decades behind most comparable countries and we are not catching up like this. That's why government have changed their policies in the last few years and focus on improving the industry via JVs, co-development and ToT, because that is the fastest way for us to reall get on high techs and that in less time. A very good decision, but now they have to fix the problems within these companies and partially with the forces too.
 
.
blah blah......Thanks mate.... :D



Can u plz explain to me how our IAF is preparing for intercepting Chengdu J 20, F-16, F-10 with LCA Tejas


Dear sir, First welcome to the forum,
If you are interested in learning about capabilities and advantages of LCA tejas MK2 the aircraft, and the program as a wider topic, there is a dedicated thread on the forum to learn. Similarly on this forum and others on the internet, you can obtain a very solid narrative on future capabilities & goals, vis-a-vis the threat perception. If there are any specifics that you would want to know, there are enough members, me included who will be more than happy to get into a discussion regarding the same. Either pose your discussion on separate thread or on the LCA dedicated thread, But lets not derail this particular thread by discussing the threat perception of foreign platforms by IAF.
 
.
No problem, you are not the first one that thought so because of my criticism of the LCA developers, but it's actually the opposite. I am very optimistic about the fighter and want to see it in operational service as soon as possible. That's why I am so disappointed about the constant delays a the silly way this so important project for India is handled. And I am more than fed up about their denial how they keep on pretending like they did everything right and why not a single decision maker of ADA or DRDO was taken responsible for the mismanagement!
In any normal company, a manager that would have messed up a project like this, would have been kicked big times, but here they keep siting in their chairs and we wonder why there is so lees improvement in the project. :hitwall:



True, but only if you have no other options and only to a certain extend! We had plenty of options to, but we didn't used them and chose the most difficult one.

- developing such a fighter for the first time was indeed ambitious, but still within our capabilities

- developing the fighter and the radar alone, was overestimation

- developing the fighter, the radar and the engine alone was simply insane!!!


And what strikes me is, that only our brave pilots, the sucurity of our nation and the tax payer have to pay the price, while those who are responsible for this kind of insiane planning didn't at all.
Btw, we are decades behind most comparable countries and we are not catching up like this. That's why government have changed their policies in the last few years and focus on improving the industry via JVs, co-development and ToT, because that is the fastest way for us to reall get on high techs and that in less time. A very good decision, but now they have to fix the problems within these companies and partially with the forces too.


I understand your disappointment and share your frustration but what you have said now has been repeated multiple times and often by you. Secondly like I said you can berate them for mismanagement not for being too ambitious. Thirdly we have a potentially good product in our hands and that is a cause for cheers.

Coming to the issue of taking a lone road to develop all techs, how many options were available to us for JVs? Not many I think. It was compulsion, not chest thumping to go alone.

Lastly fighter, radar and engine are techs unrelated to each other. How combining them makes someone insane, beats me.
 
. .
Dear sir, First welcome to the forum,
If you are interested in learning about capabilities and advantages of LCA tejas MK2 the aircraft, and the program as a wider topic, there is a dedicated thread on the forum to learn. Similarly on this forum and others on the internet, you can obtain a very solid narrative on future capabilities & goals, vis-a-vis the threat perception. If there are any specifics that you would want to know, there are enough members, me included who will be more than happy to get into a discussion regarding the same. Either pose your discussion on separate thread or on the LCA dedicated thread, But lets not derail this particular thread by discussing the threat perception of foreign platforms by IAF.

Ok..the topic is : Tejas designer target world class technologies for mark II fighter.
My personal views about this news is - it is too late......the most advanced version of tejas should hv been operationalized on or b4 year 2010(30 years of development time). Now, I dont feel DRDO/ADA is to be blamed for this alone, IAF too must share the responsibility.
The topic says - Tejas designer target world class technologies for mark II fighter. My point is, so did the engineers & scientists when they first set out to develop this plane in the 1980s for the original Tejas mark I.........and we know the result. A state of the art radar was to be developed, new engines, new airframe design, within 10 years and with engineers having zero experience in this field. It was a masterplan, aint it ????
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom