HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[sancho]

I cant believe you can say such a thing. sancho is one of the most knowledgeable indian members on this forum. He has the respect of a lot of members.

Oke i think we shouldnt accuse some one has trolling if he is not agreeing with your views... he has his own view and he puts the same in the form of proof... if you dont agree just counter it with your point....

Even I too had lot of heated discussion with him many times... just take what is valuable.. so far we have seen him never moved out of the topic...

Thanks guys, but it's not worth to make a big discussion out of it. Hhe might not liked that I corrected some of his points and that's why this is his reaction. I didn't felt the need to reply on it, just like I didn't on his earlier accusations which had gone too OT and to unnecessary flame games with Chinese members.

the main point is no one even trusted the DRDO capabilities to build LCA when the project comes up and then in the senctins comes up.....how could you say then india shouls have gone for co-developing and partner on LCA ...

The engine and radar developments had nothing to do with DRDO, but LRDE and GTRE. These are the 2 parts of the LCA program that failed and caused the delays and that was unnecessary as I explaind. The sanctions had their part, but bad planing and overestimating were the bigger problem!

For example, GTRE had no experience with engine developments and still they was chosen to develop Kaveri engine alone. Why not HAL that had experience with the licence productions of several Russian and western engines?
Why did they planed with Kaveri from the start, why not with a proven stop gap engine first?
Even Dassault fitted the proven GE 404 engine into Rafale prototypes, till M88 was ready! We could have integrated RD93 (single engine version of the RD33 that HAL produces in India), or the Snecma M53-P2 (engine of Mirage 2000), both safe and sanctionproof options that were even in operational service in IAF.

As you can see, there were better ways and good options available, but we wanted to do it alone and paid the price. Now 20 years later we have 2 different foreign engines for LCA and most likely and co-development for Kaveri engine, because we had to admit that we couldn't do it alone and the same can be said about MMR/AESA as well.

 

[sancho]

2. per flight cost of PAK-FA will be too high... AMCA will have less (assumption)

That's the only real advantage it will have, otherwise it doesn't offer us anything that we couldn't get through FGFA anyway. From the operational point of view AURA UCAV gives way more advantages to IAF than AMCA could and it would be even more cost-effective (single engine, no radar, less mechanical parts for flight performance, no cockpit...).

 

[kingdurgaking]

That's the only real advantage it will have, otherwise it doesn't offer us anything that we couldn't get through FGFA anyway. From the operational point of view AURA UCAV gives way more advantages to IAF than AMCA could and it would be even more cost-effective (single engine, no radar, less mechanical parts for flight performance, no cockpit...).

One advantage is though AMCA doesn't seem much value... but it is very much a needed program to develope the expertise because for country like India (we are NAM) should be able to be independent.. we are late in this field and we need to carry on...

 

[MumbaiIndians]

LCA is an R&D project. R&D doesn't work by deadlines. Manufacturing does.

IAF is quite immature to set deadlines on LCA because these half-educated immature IAF types learn about technology trends by roaming around in weapon shows or reading western magazines but never hold any masters or never had any work experience on engineering R&D project on the floor, to understand how it evolves in a laboratory.

On other hand, USAF has highly qualified technicians/scientists as advisors in their top bodies, who have actually worked in defence research labs for decades. They don't blabber in public like Indian Airforce officers do. They don't whine when 20 GE engines are blasting on tedbeds in a row or when F-35 IOC is delayed to 2018.

India is still immature country when it comes to mindset of people(specially those in IAF and Army). Closing down of R&D division working on Marut, was biggest blunder IAF committed and for which India is still paying the price.

The same fatal mindset still exist in armed forces.

Unless you bring in people from research labs(DRDO,HAL,NAL) into IAF's top management, the situation won't change and media circus(IAF officers getting loose motions over LCA) will continue.

As I said, IAF, Indian Army has lot of morons(armchair experts) in their top management who has zero work experience to make any sensible projections/decisions over LCA, AMCA or even Kaveri.

DRDO/HAL never failed to deliver. Actually, they did far better job than even Western/european counterparts. It was IAF who misconceptualized/misprojected their expectations because of their lack of experience.

 

[sancho]

One advantage is though AMCA doesn't seem much value... but it is very much a needed program to develope the expertise because for country like India (we are NAM) should be able to be independent.. we are late in this field and we need to carry on...

But what expertise can we get that we wouldn't get through LCA MK2, MMRCA, FGFA, AURA UCAV?

- stealth aiframe design and materials => FGFA, AURA UCAV
- Engine developments => LCA MK2, Kaveri - Snecma co-development, MMRCA, FGFA
- AESA radar => LCA MK2, MMRCA, FGFA,
- NG avionics => MMRCA, FGFA
- Remote control of aircrafts => DRDO Rustom, unmanned helicopter (with IAI), AURA UCAV


As you can see, most fields are already covered and most of them through co-developments, JV, or ToT for licence productions, so why should we develop AMCA to get the same again? Also if gathering experience and knowledge is the aim, isn't a tech demonstrator like Gripen NG, Su 47, or Mig 1.44 enough?

 

[MumbaiIndians]

The engine and radar developments had nothing to do with DRDO, but LRDE and GTRE.

Mr. Biggest troll of LCA thread, LRDE and GTRE are both laboratories of DRDO.

DRDO

 

[MumbaiIndians]

But what expertise can we get(from AMCA), that we wouldn't get through LCA MK2, MMRCA, FGFA, AURA UCAV?

Experience of designing your own 5th generation stealth aircraft from paper to flight stage?

 

[MumbaiIndians]

Also if gathering experience and knowledge is the aim, isn't a tech demonstrator like Gripen NG, Su 47, or Mig 1.44 enough?

That's because people who manufacture Su-30MKI in HAL, know zero about aircraft design. All they can do is, look at instructions delivered by Russians and join pieces together and test it.

Such people are called technicians. We need designers(those who design things like Su-30MKI, Rafale). That's what LCA has given us and more work on AMCA will keep these designers within India.

 

[kish]

Hmmm . . . People here must read proper and research a little before posting something . . . .

 

[kingdurgaking]

But what expertise can we get that we wouldn't get through LCA MK2, MMRCA, FGFA, AURA UCAV?

- stealth aiframe design and materials => FGFA, AURA UCAV
- Engine developments => LCA MK2, Kaveri - Snecma co-development, MMRCA, FGFA
- AESA radar => LCA MK2, MMRCA, FGFA,
- NG avionics => MMRCA, FGFA
- Remote control of aircrafts => DRDO Rustom, unmanned helicopter (with IAI), AURA UCAV


As you can see, most fields are already covered and most of them through co-developments, JV, or ToT for licence productions, so why should we develop AMCA to get the same again? Also if gathering experience and knowledge is the aim, isn't a tech demonstrator like Gripen NG, Su 47, or Mig 1.44 enough?

The experience is we need AMCA which will be indigenous like ALH\LCH or Arjun... we went for JV for lot of parts in ALH... but we could build LCH we just the need for time.. when you look at our Aersenal ... which is full of older versions at 2030 we will not have most of the older versions

what we will have
3 squad of Mig 29
3 squad of Mirage (incase we upgrade)
10 squad of MMRCA
13 squad of super MKI
13 squad of FGFA
6 squad of LCA

which is 48 squad that is sanctioned... but mig 29 and Mirage may not stand agains 48.. so what will you go for? will you go for MMRCA and MKI?? no it is safe to go for 6 squad of AMCA which will be more potent at that time...

 

[MumbaiIndians]

AMCA will break all western and european records in terms of timeframe(design-to-prototype as well as prototype-to-IOC) and fusion of wide-range complex technologies.

Anyone wanna bet against me?

 

[kingdurgaking]

wanted to add more.. by 2030 MKI would have almost come to the end of its life.. and it is safe to replace with AMCA than go for an upgrade

 

[sancho]

The experience is we need AMCA which will be indigenous like ALH\LCH or Arjun... we went for JV for lot of parts in ALH... but we could build LCH we just the need for time..

No, we build LCH exactly because we did it the right way with Dhruv! Dhruv might be an indigenous project, but heavily dependent on foreing input (mainly German and French) and we used it as a base to learn and get experience, which now makes us able to redesign Dhruv to LCH, or develop LUH alone.

If we had gone the same succesful way with LCA, we would have gone for co-developments as I mentioned earlier, or even teamed up with a foreign nation that has more experience (Sweden for example), had it operational by now like Dhruv and would be able to redesign LCA alone (NLCA required help from EADS and they searched for US help as well).

when you look at our Aersenal ... which is full of older versions at 2030 we will not have most of the older versions...

First of all, AMCA is aimed to be ready by 2022/25 and FGFA will already be in production by then. Secondly the only fighters that could be replaced in that time by AMCA are Jaguars, which are purly ground attack fighters, meant for deep penetration strikes. AURA UCAV can be available at least at that time as well and would be the way better replacement for Jags then AMCA.
There is nor operational necessity for AMCA, when you have a 5th gen air superioirty fighter, as well a 5th gen UCAV for strikes, on top of huge numbers of 4.5 gen LCA, MMRCA, MKI. We could simply increase FGFA and AURA numbers and by 2035/40 we need an even more capable fighter than AMCA to replace MKIs. AMCA by then will be as late as LCA is today!

 

[Black Widow]

@ sancho:

You are a respected member of this forum (at least among Indian). your posts are most of the time useful and informative. Its not crime to accept others view during discussion if you feel its valid, even though its contradicting ur view...

Adamant behavior doesn't pay...

 

[ramu]

LCA is an R&D project. R&D doesn't work by deadlines. Manufacturing does.

IAF is quite immature to set deadlines on LCA because these half-educated immature IAF types learn about technology trends by roaming around in weapon shows or reading western magazines but never hold any masters or never had any work experience on engineering R&D project on the floor, to understand how it evolves in a laboratory.

On other hand, USAF has highly qualified technicians/scientists as advisors in their top bodies, who have actually worked in defence research labs for decades. They don't blabber in public like Indian Airforce officers do. They don't whine when 20 GE engines are blasting on tedbeds in a row or when F-35 IOC is delayed to 2018.

India is still immature country when it comes to mindset of people(specially those in IAF and Army). Closing down of R&D division working on Marut, was biggest blunder IAF committed and for which India is still paying the price.

The same fatal mindset still exist in armed forces.

Unless you bring in people from research labs(DRDO,HAL,NAL) into IAF's top management, the situation won't change and media circus(IAF officers getting loose motions over LCA) will continue.

As I said, IAF, Indian Army has lot of morons(armchair experts) in their top management who has zero work experience to make any sensible projections/decisions over LCA, AMCA or even Kaveri.

DRDO/HAL never failed to deliver. Actually, they did far better job than even Western/european counterparts. It was IAF who misconceptualized/misprojected their expectations because of their lack of experience.

R & D does work on deadlines. We are not building a spaceship to Neptune. No country has infinite resources and unlimited time. ISRO also had the same problems as DRDO, ADA. The only differnce being ISRO is associated with success 9 on 10 times.