Tejas designers target world class technologies for Mark II fighter

[sancho]

Secondly like I said you can berate them for mismanagement not for being too ambitious.

As I showed you can, which is proven by the failure of Kaveri K9 and that MMR is still not ready, it couldn't be more obvious.

Thirdly we have a potentially good product in our hands and that is a cause for cheers.

Yes we have, but the potential alone doesn't get us anything and with every year of delay it is shrinking.
Think about it, an LCA MK1 with above mentioned configurations would not only be in IAF service now, but could be even exported to countries like Vietnam, Indonesia. That would be reasons to cheer, not the roll out of LSP 6, or NP-1 prototypes!

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.

Not really, we had and still have Russia, France and Israel for JV.

Lastly fighter, radar and engine are techs unrelated to each other. How combining them makes someone insane, beats me.

Because they were not unrelated developments! They developed Kaveri engine for LCA, without chosing a proven stopgap engine, although we had options and that's where the delays of the project started. Kaveri didn't turn out as they "hoped" and LCA was left without an engine, that's why we had to procure GE 404 engine and now GE 414 and now, they finally de-linked it from LCA.
Same happed with the radar developments and as I said, all this could have been avioded with more realism of their capabilities and a more logical way of planing the project.

 

[mark_t]

As I showed you can, which is proven by the failure of Kaveri K9 and that MMR is still not ready, it couldn't be more obvious.

You are just exaggerating and twisting the facts. The fact is that even China, which has replicated and copied many other technologies, has been unable to get going on Fighter engine. India started Kaveri development in collaboration with US companies which left the project abruptly after Nuke tests. DRDO is still banned for dual use tech. from US. Despite all this and the complexity of making jet engines, a lot of progress has been made.

As far as MMR is concerned, there are lobbies from Israel and Russia which make the people compare anything that is made by India with the other products on offer from these countries. And obviously one simply doesn't produce an ELTA 2032 as the first prototype. These things take time as can be seen in the development model of other producing countries.

So obviously you are making sweeping comments with little to show for.

Yes we have, but the potential alone doesn't get us anything and with every year of delay it is shrinking.
Think about it, an LCA MK1 with above mentioned configurations would not only be in IAF service now, but could be even exported to countries like Vietnam, Indonesia. That would be reasons to cheer, not the roll out of LSP 6, or NP-1 prototypes!

Again you are proving yourself to be a novice. The prototypes and LSP's have to be rolled first and only then can we think about exporting LCA. We don't want to be PAF kind of AirForce which due to shortage in numbers resorted to accepting JF-17 without waiting for the capabilities to be proved and thus payed for it by crash of atleast 1 JF-17 due to braking issues.

Moreover the pilots of IAF who have the chance to fly on LCA, already rated it among the best available fighters and much ahead of Mig-21 which LCA will replace.

Because they were not unrelated developments! They developed Kaveri engine for LCA, without chosing a proven stopgap engine, although we had options and that's where the delays of the project started. Kaveri didn't turn out as they "hoped" and LCA was left without an engine, that's why we had to procure GE 404 engine and now GE 414 and now, they finally de-linked it from LCA.
Same happed with the radar developments and as I said, all this could have been avioded with more realism of their capabilities and a more logical way of planing the project.

The time for 90's to 2010 saw incorporation of many new technologies and different frames. India too bet on some like SU-27 and got rewarded. LCA was conceptualized just before the 90's and thus a lot of changes had to made to initial plans. The above comments by you dont place the context in which all this happened starting with US's withdrawal of support for Kaveri.

 

[Captain Spark]

Absolutely, China and the US is ahead in manufacturing. But they enabled ppl to grow in their respective fields which is something I believe India needs to do. China is smart they learned how to speak the international language of money. They knew the only way they could break out and grow was to embrace capitalism but with one hitch, it has to be done in their favor. They expoited their huge population and sold it well to Western Investors. They enforce a policy whereas any company wants to do business with China has to partner up with a local company. They understood Western Psych and made it a point to build their cities, to rid them of images of poverty and to showcase how they are modern and climbing even if the rural areas tell a different side. The point I am trying to make is that we have capable ppl but something is holding us back. If it education, then its a structural issue. We can nurture young talent better. We need a system that identifies the best and brightest better. Maybe a new civil servant exam but make it harder and tougher and let it guage all aspects of mental aptitude as well as emotional and physical. Make the tools available to everyone who want a shot. But what do we do when its burecracy issue? How do we overcome that ineptitude?


When it comes to manufacturing there are so many realms. High tech and low tech. How do you get better at it? Focus on how to maximize profit, therefore you design a poduction line that is more efficient, works more hours, produces more product, more orbotics involved , less human factors, etc. Whatever I am saying is not 1000% accurate but its a start. Manufacturing is key. China till now was copying what Western and Japanese powers did decades ago to modernize and industralize, we need to set our goals high and get rid of thic culture of choosing foreign over domestic products all the time. I mean Foreign stuff is great but we wil only get better when we work to overcome problems and innovate. We need to start old center of learning not for profit like in Ancient India where great teachers and students get together to make discoveries.

To do all these we'll need a good neta.....and our netas fight against each other, the good of the country comes last on their mind.

 

[sancho]

You are just exaggerating and twisting the facts. The fact is that even China, which has replicated and copied many other technologies, has been unable to get going on Fighter engine.

Lol and still they were able to get JF17 and J10 into serial production and do you know why? Because they didn't directly linked their fighter developments to their engine developments!
They took proven Russian engines instead (which we btw rejeted) and developed their own engines as side projects, which are meant to be integrated in later stages. That's exactly like most other countries in the world have done it, so there is nothing exaggerated at all, but sometimes the truth hurts.

As far as MMR is concerned, there are lobbies from Israel and Russia which make the people compare anything that is made by India with the other products on offer from these countries.

Who said MMR needs to be equal to 2032? But by linking both developments, the fighter was dependent on a successful MMR development, without doing so and simply taking the same 2032 as stop gaps, that we used in Jaguar and Sea Harriers, we would have been able to further developing LCA, without waiting for MMR. And again, MMR could have been integrated into follow orders when it was ready, no big deal at all, but we simply thought we can do all 3 developments at once and that is a big deal!

Again you are proving yourself to be a novice.

How about reading first, before getting into silly judgements? He said we have something to cheer, but there is nothing to cheer when you only produce prototypes, although the fighter could be ready by now, if these companies would have done a better job.

Moreover the pilots of IAF who have the chance to fly on LCA, already rated it among the best available fighters and much ahead of Mig-21 which LCA will replace.

EXACTLY, that's why I want it to be in service as soon as possible, to replace Mig 21 and why I want a simple LCA MK2, that fixes the problems of MK1, instead of wasting more time to develop single screen touchscreens for a low end fighter. We need these fighter today, not only in 2018 or so and the more new things we want to add now, the more MK2 will be delayed too.

 

[arbit]

As I showed you can, which is proven by the failure of Kaveri K9 and that MMR is still not ready, it couldn't be more obvious.

No you didn't. You chided them for being ambitious. Should I quote your post? Thats where i disgreed with you. For the rest we are on the same page.

Yes we have, but the potential alone doesn't get us anything and with every year of delay it is shrinking.
Think about it, an LCA MK1 with above mentioned configurations would not only be in IAF service now, but could be even exported to countries like Vietnam, Indonesia. That would be reasons to cheer, not the roll out of LSP 6, or NP-1 prototypes!

LCA MK1 has given way to MK2 which will be in service as expected without too much delay. As far as exporting fighters etc are concerned, all i can say is good if you think so. Also remember retrospect is always the genius, its foresight that really counts.

Not really, we had and still have Russia, France and Israel for JV.

Are you sure. We have them now, we didn't have them back then. Also the money needed for such jvs was scarce. But lets not get into that.


Because they were not unrelated developments! They developed Kaveri engine for LCA, without chosing a proven stopgap engine, although we had options and that's where the delays of the project started. Kaveri didn't turn out as they "hoped" and LCA was left without an engine, that's why we had to procure GE 404 engine and now GE 414 and now, they finally de-linked it from LCA.
Same happed with the radar developments and as I said, all this could have been avioded with more realism of their capabilities and a more logical way of planing the project.

Sancho ji you differentiated them in your post and classified them into fighter radar and engine separately. We are not talking about the finished product here.

But rather than proving you wrong, i would much prefer to read your posts. In any case im being lazy and have diverted from topic.

Aur koi nayi khabar?!

 

[qwerrty]

excuse for further delay. next, designers are targeting 'star trek' technologies..

 

[sancho]

No you didn't. You chided them for being ambitious. Should I quote your post? Thats where i disgreed with you. For the rest we are on the same page.

Yes and I clearly showed why, let me quote myself:

- 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!!!

So again, they directly linked all developments, they went for them alone without any knowledge and experience, they rejected offers for stopgap engines, radars or even co-development, with the result that the fighter faces huge delays and cost-increases, the radar is still not ready and the engine development was even a failure and you still believe they wasn't overambitious???

Also remember retrospect is always the genius, its foresight that really counts.

You don't have to be a genius to know that developing something from the scratch is difficult, it's simple logic!
That's why we should have taken the concerns of IAF more seriously, that had doubts about the capabilities of DRDO and ADA to be able to do such a development as they claimed. So the foresight was there, but sadly the decisionmakers back then believed in the totally unrealistic claims of DRDO and ADA.

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

excuse for further delay. next, designers are targeting 'star trek' technologies..

some countries cant even make pens ....but they laugh when other tries, some countries copies perfectly and then paint different and claim its not copy and don't look like the original , see we add a bulb which was not added in original

 

[Black Widow]

Because they were not unrelated developments! They developed Kaveri engine for LCA, without chosing a proven stopgap engine, although we had options and that's where the delays of the project started. Kaveri didn't turn out as they "hoped" and LCA was left without an engine, that's why we had to procure GE 404 engine and now GE 414 and now, they finally de-linked it from LCA.
Same happed with the radar developments and as I said, all this could have been avioded with more realism of their capabilities and a more logical way of planing the project.


Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian...nologies-mark-ii-fighter-6.html#ixzz2F1dhRGvm

This is truth but there are some more truth to understand.

a) No country was ready to give us engine in 90s. So Kaveri was planned.
b) Our Machine Marut died coz of underpowered engine and trust me neither USA, nor USSR provided help to revive it.
c) When west saw India can make own engine, or get engine from other source they started showing interest in us....


Yes today Kaveri sound like blunder to us, but in 80s and 90s we didn't had any options..

 

[sancho]

a) No country was ready to give us engine in 90s. So Kaveri was planned.

As often explained, that's not correct! Russia had offered us RD93, the single engine variant of RD 33 that HAL already was producing in India under licence, France had never an issue providing us with French engines for Dhruv, or even to co-develop Shakti engine and is even today to only western country that offers us an engine co-development.
Israel had offered us Dash HMS, Litenting pod, Mayavi co-development...for LCA, so only because the US and some of their allies sanctioned us a decade later, it doesn't mean we had no other options. That's just a myth that is used as an excuse, nothing else.

 

[Storm Force]

DISASTROUS PROJECT LCA

IAF will get the LCA eventually decade too late and in very small nos to have no real impact on IAF prepardeness