HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[Anony]

Where is LSP6? Why it has gone missing? Does it mean the LSP8 will also not meet required AoA as this test was to be performed
on LSP6.

 

[David2mayes]

have a nice day!!

 

[sudhir007]

Flight test update

From

LCA-Tejas has completed 1980 Test Flights Successfully. (15-Jan-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-238,PV5-36,LSP3-89,LSP4-56,LSP5-118,LSP7-15,NP1-4)

to

LCA-Tejas has completed 1981 Test Flights Successfully. (16-Jan-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-238,PV5-36,LSP3-90,LSP4-56,LSP5-118,LSP7-15,NP1-4)

 

[sancho]

I have worked for HAL long enough, I have been the biggest critic of ADA due to my experience. I have quite a few close friends who have personally work with project, and I put my thoughts based on informed reliable opinions and my interpretations of ground realities and their implications.

Hi Sandy, from your experience and knowledge, can you say if or what HAL would have done differently in the overall LCA project, if they would have been in charge and not ADA/DRDO?

 

[MilSpec]

Hi Sandy, from your experience and knowledge, can you say if or what HAL would have done differently in the overall LCA project, if they would have been in charge and not ADA/DRDO?

Sancho,

My understanding is MoD ditched HAL in mid 80's when they wanted to take on the LCA project, instead they went ahead and conceptualized from scratch ADA/NAL which were drdo brainchild. First thing that comes to my mind is the talent pool. ADA needed a considerable longer time to break it's engineers and technicians. This lead time proved to be very costly. ADA did not much knowledge of material testing especially in composites and had a very steep learning curve in defining , handling and producing CRFP. HAL would not have faced the above problems. HAL as been certifying alloys and composites long before ADA and has an exceptional environment and test protocols, which were non-existent in ada. They are up to date now, but it costed us valuable time.

If LCA project was in the hands of HAL, the design would have been at par and would have been a optimal production design based on the capabilities available instead of design that needs to optimized and re-engineered to suit the current setup. Certain block at MoD was very interested in dealing with LM, in case of HAL most probably that role would have been divided into dasault and Knaapo, which would have helped considerably.


There are quite a few component testing blunders that ADA and associated labs have done which I cannot reveal in a public sphere, would have not been there if HAL was incharge. Transition of design prototypes to production versions would have been easier, less time consuming. Amount of re-engineering, tooling design for manufacturing would be lesser. The rate at which the mk2 design is being integrated imo would have taken a shorter lead time compared to what is being done right now.

Delivering a project just doesn't mean specifying a product and it's sub assmblies. Now the idea was that ADA will make design package and give it to HAL, what HAL expected from ADA was the same as it does from BAE or Irkut, that is design data( assembly, component, material, layout, ) and production data (tooling, fixtures, treatment, layout, interim test checks, RCA plans). ADA barely could deliver assembly component and material data, production data was non-existent. In other words ADA has achieved what a TRV - design unit from HAL could have done on it's own.

Gross mis-management and mis handling on ADA's part is actually due to MoD and it's directives. Hopefully transition from mk1 to Mk2 will be easier with HAL playing a bigger part. But unfortunately my fear is with rafale on the horizon, mki at full swing, there is a fat chance HAL might put the cheaper barely profitable LCA on the back burner.

 

[Paan Singh]

@sandy_3126

Do u think HAL can absorb rafale? and u think HAL can manufacture rafale at fast rate?

 

[Sergi]

Sancho,

My understanding is MoD ditched HAL in mid 80's when they wanted to take on the LCA project, instead they went ahead and conceptualized from scratch ADA/NAL which were drdo brainchild. First thing that comes to my mind is the talent pool. ADA needed a considerable longer time to break it's engineers and technicians. This lead time proved to be very costly. ADA did not much knowledge of material testing especially in composites and had a very steep learning curve in defining , handling and producing CRFP. HAL would not have faced the above problems. HAL as been certifying alloys and composites long before ADA and has an exceptional environment and test protocols, which were non-existent in ada. They are up to date now, but it costed us valuable time.

If LCA project was in the hands of HAL, the design would have been at par and would have been a optimal production design based on the capabilities available instead of design that needs to optimized and re-engineered to suit the current setup. Certain block at MoD was very interested in dealing with LM, in case of HAL most probably that role would have been divided into dasault and Knaapo, which would have helped considerably.


There are quite a few component testing blunders that ADA and associated labs have done which I cannot reveal in a public sphere, would have not been there if HAL was incharge. Transition of design prototypes to production versions would have been easier, less time consuming. Amount of re-engineering, tooling design for manufacturing would be lesser. The rate at which the mk2 design is being integrated imo would have taken a shorter lead time compared to what is being done right now.

Delivering a project just doesn't mean specifying a product and it's sub assmblies. Now the idea was that ADA will make design package and give it to HAL, what HAL expected from ADA was the same as it does from BAE or Irkut, that is design data( assembly, component, material, layout, ) and production data (tooling, fixtures, treatment, layout, interim test checks, RCA plans). ADA barely could deliver assembly component and material data, production data was non-existent. In other words ADA has achieved what a TRV - design unit from HAL could have done on it's own.

Gross mis-management and mis handling on ADA's part is actually due to MoD and it's directives. Hopefully transition from mk1 to Mk2 will be easier with HAL playing a bigger part. But unfortunately my fear is with rafale on the horizon, mki at full swing, there is a fat chance HAL might put the cheaper barely profitable LCA on the back burner.

Why do you think that sir ???
Rafale and MKIs won't fit in day to day low cost operations. LCA can. And more over to keep the SQD number we need LCA MK-2 in numbers 200+. If they ditch LCA how they gona achieve it ???

 

[MilSpec]

@sandy_3126

Do u think HAL can absorb rafale? and u think HAL can manufacture rafale at fast rate?

There is a problem .... According to me the main guys who have delivered largest airframes is Nasik Division, (mig21's mig 23 assm, mig 27 assm, upgrades and overhaul, su30MKI's), other division that has delivered is banglore div which has many enclaves but none of them are big enough. Nasik div would have been ideal for rafales, but it is clogged with MKI's and as soon as it's done the mki it will commence FGFA, in some circles the news is fgfa might see initial CKD assemblies along with the mki production line.
What that essentially means Banglore division would need additional capabilities, CNC profilers, treatment shops, AL stamping units, koraput and korwa divisions will also need additional capabilities to accommodate rafale's avionics and propulsions. Rafale being twin engined a/c will need nearly the same rate of production as the mki's propulsion needs. It's going to be a very challenging task. They need to start recruitment right now and depute the work force for training in nasik division and then transfer them to banglore when the lines are being setup.

Hopefully this is how it might look
Nasik= MKI+mig27/mig 21 overhaul----->>FGFA+MKI/mig 27 overhaul
Banglore = AJT+jaguar overhaul+ Rafale + LCA---->> AMCA

 

[MilSpec]

Why do you think that sir ???
Rafale and MKIs won't fit in day to day low cost operations. LCA can. And more over to keep the SQD number we need LCA MK-2 in numbers 200+. If they ditch LCA how they gona achieve it ???

That is IAF's prerogative not HAL's. IAF doesn't discount HAL to be patriotic, it doesn't discount hal as it does to Knaapo/irkut, or even Dassault. IAF will blindly sign a cheque for knaapo based on a paper plane, but wont release money for LCA MK1 on HAL' guarantee. If IAF is confident that LCA is sqdn strength builder and will cost less to operate, shouldn't they stand behind HAL to ensure an orderbook of say 250 mk2 + 50 trainers.

I hope I am wrong, but IAF ki neeyat badal gayee hai.... Today IAF's coffers are full, they can afford to replace all it's single engine point defence interceptor like Mig21 by a frontline air dominance fighter Su30MKI and omnirole Rafale. Hence importance of a agile LWF is not on their cards right now. If IAF want's to go toe 2 toe with PLAAF, they would look be beyond LCA. I really hope my fears are foolish.

 

[Sergi]

That is IAF's prerogative not HAL's. IAF doesn't discount HAL to be patriotic, it doesn't discount hal as it does to Knaapo/irkut, or even Dassault. IAF will blindly sign a cheque for knaapo based on a paper plane, but wont release money for LCA MK1 on HAL' guarantee. If IAF is confident that LCA is sqdn strength builder and will cost less to operate, shouldn't they stand behind HAL to ensure an orderbook of say 250 mk2 + 50 trainers.

I hope I am wrong, but IAF ki neeyat badal gayee hai.... Today IAF's coffers are full, they can afford to replace all it's single engine point defence interceptor like Mig21 by a frontline air dominance fighter Su30MKI and omnirole Rafale. Hence importance of a agile LWF is not on their cards right now. If IAF want's to go toe 2 toe with PLAAF, they would look be beyond LCA. I really hope my fears are foolish.

Well sir you know my opinion about DRDO/HAL/ADA so not going in details again.

IAF do have some mistakes in decision making on LCA front. But I will disagree with you on confidence point. Means if look at the records of our above PSUs and firms we get big promises and increase our expectations but with the delivery we get something unexpected. That is rarely the case with forgin firms cuz they have years of experience.

IAF do need a low cost option and they will demand MK-2. and yes HAL have to have work on low profits in this project cuz it is getting all of the big govt deals without any competition . It's like Monoploy in the field.

 

[MilSpec]

Well sir you know my opinion about DRDO/HAL/ADA so not going in details again.

IAF do have some mistakes in decision making on LCA front. But I will disagree with you on confidence point. Means if look at the records of our above PSUs and firms we get big promises and increase our expectations but with the delivery to get something unexpected. That is rarely the case with forgin firms cuz they have years of experience.

IAF do need a low cost option and they will demand MK-2. and yes HAL have to have work on low profits in this project cuz it is getting all of the big govt deals without any competition . It's like Monoploy in the field.

The only alternative to LCA at the price point IAF is looking at is FC1 from china... good luck getting that.

When it comes to making a light fighter, the objective is to deploy it large numbers case and point f16, mig 21, mig 29, (minimum is around 350+ to alteast break even), after toiling hard when you come up with a confirmed order book of 48, what should HAL do.

I am in no way suggesting HAL is not at fault, but IAF needs be a little less stingy, show more confidence in HAL, and in other words be a little punjabi (if you know what i mean). IAF needs to chill, needs to make an order book of atleast 350 jet... so HAL can dedicate a seperate line for MK2, provide mk2 in three tranches. Accept the first tranche with MMR Passive radar, next tranche with better engine and AESA, and then keep developing it.

 

[Sergi]

The only alternative to LCA at the price point IAF is looking at is FC1 from china... good luck getting that.

When it comes to making a light fighter, the objective is to deploy it large numbers case and point f16, mig 21, mig 29, (minimum is around 350+ to alteast break even), after toiling hard when you come up with a confirmed order book of 48, what should HAL do.

I am in no way suggesting HAL is not at fault, but IAF needs be a little less stingy, show more confidence in HAL, and in other words be a little punjabi (if you know what i mean). IAF needs to chill, needs to make an order book of atleast 350 jet... so HAL can dedicate a seperate line for MK2, provide mk2 in three tranches. Accept the first tranche with MMR Passive radar, next tranche with better engine and AESA, and then keep developing it.

Well sir if MK-2 gives what it promises I think IAF will definatly go for 300+ jets. The cause of low order is the lack of confidence agree. But we need to win the confidence. If HAL/DRDO/ADA work together and keep coordination then it's achievable.

IAF has to meet its all needs. They can't invest out of proportion in one project on confidence.
I think our PSUs have to prove themself so our forces can and will show faith in them. IN is already there

 

[rockstarIN]

There is a problem .... According to me the main guys who have delivered largest airframes is Nasik Division, (mig21's mig 23 assm, mig 27 assm, upgrades and overhaul, su30MKI's), other division that has delivered is banglore div which has many enclaves but none of them are big enough. Nasik div would have been ideal for rafales, but it is clogged with MKI's and as soon as it's done the mki it will commence FGFA, in some circles the news is fgfa might see initial CKD assemblies along with the mki production line.
What that essentially means Banglore division would need additional capabilities, CNC profilers, treatment shops, AL stamping units, koraput and korwa divisions will also need additional capabilities to accommodate rafale's avionics and propulsions. Rafale being twin engined a/c will need nearly the same rate of production as the mki's propulsion needs. It's going to be a very challenging task. They need to start recruitment right now and depute the work force for training in nasik division and then transfer them to banglore when the lines are being setup.

Hopefully this is how it might look
Nasik= MKI+mig27/mig 21 overhaul----->>FGFA+MKI/mig 27 overhaul
Banglore = AJT+jaguar overhaul+ Rafale + LCA---->> AMCA

There is already a new division is coming up in Northern side of Kerala for the electronics part production facility.

 

[sancho]

When it comes to making a light fighter, the objective is to deploy it large numbers case and point f16, mig 21, mig 29, (minimum is around 350+ to alteast break even), after toiling hard when you come up with a confirmed order book of 48, what should HAL do.

That was the initial goal, but with all the delays of the project, the future potential is getting lower as well. By now and with MMRCA as an alternative, 200 LCAs will be the max for IAF, which still is a good number, the problem is only, that we fail to do things simple like the Chinese can, we often want to much and make things too complicated again.
Take the MK2 for instance, we had weight and thrust issues, so instead of fixing these things only and induct the version with MMR as soon as possible, we now added fuel tanks, more avionics, IRST, possibly even a new radar and to make it even worse, also want a complete new cockpit. These changes obviously needs more time, with more vulnerability to new delays as well, which explains the hasitation to further orders.
However, I agree with you that IAF should have ordered and inducted the MK1s way earlier, since they are clearly more capable than many of the older Migs, but I think that has to do with the long and slow testing process of ADA/HAL as well.

 

[Sergi]

That was the initial goal, but with all the delays of the project, the future potential is getting lower as well. By now and with MMRCA as an alternative, 200 LCAs will be the max for IAF, which still is a good number, the problem is only, that we fail to do things simple like the Chinese can, we often want to much and make things too complicated again.
Take the MK2 for instance, we had weight and thrust issues, so instead of fixing these things only and induct the version with MMR as soon as possible, we now added fuel tanks, more avionics, IRST, possibly even a new radar and to make it even worse, also want a complete new cockpit. These changes obviously needs more time, with more vulnerability to new delays as well, which explains the hasitation to further orders.
However, I agree with you that IAF should have ordered and inducted the MK1s way earlier, since they are clearly more capable than many of the older Migs, but I think that has to do with the long and slow testing process of ADA/HAL as well.


I am in no way suggesting HAL is not at fault, but IAF needs be a little less stingy, show more confidence in HAL, and in other words be a little punjabi (if you know what i mean). IAF needs to chill, needs to make an order book of atleast 350 jet... so HAL can dedicate a seperate line for MK2, provide mk2 in three tranches. Accept the first tranche with MMR Passive radar, next tranche with better engine and AESA, and then keep developing it.

[/QUOTE]

Wow !!! One surprising thing here @sandy_3126 (one of the defenders of HAL/DRDO) and @sancho ( one of the biggest critisizer of the HAL/DRDO ) agreeing on same point

@Topic : I got an apportunity to talk one of the retired IAF high ranker about a year ago. We talked on a lot of issues from Apache/Rafale/typhoon to LCA. He said IAF want LCA to be a low cost 4+ gen AC and NOT just to replace Mig-21s. he said MK-1 will be inducted just as training and testing AC but MK-2 will be added in 250+ numbers (12/14 SQD )