Was INDIA's LCA TEJAS a FAILURE? Let's FIND OUT! (LCA Tejas Documentary)

[anniyan]

Was INDIA's LCA TEJAS a FAILURE? Let's FIND OUT! (LCA Tejas Documentary)

 

[ranadd]

Tejas as a program will never be a failure for India. Just wet dreams for the nay sayers.

It was never just about the end product.

Either way, 2018 is going to be a definitive year. Everyone will swallow their words. But good that forums have DBs.

 

[proud_indian]

Tejas as a program will never be a failure for India. Just wet dreams for the nay sayers.

It was never just about the end product.

Either way, 2018 is going to be a definitive year. Everyone will swallow their words. But good that forums have DBs.

Don't underestimate them, they'll always come up with new rants like what's the point of a 3rd gen plane after 100 years in the making and what not.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Tejas is exactly like the HF-24 Marut program.

Failure or not? take your pick.

 

[takeitwithyou]

Tejas is exactly like the HF-24 Marut program.

Failure or not? take your pick.

I know of only one aircraft that forced another country's aircraft canceling its participation from an airshow.

After having read multiple documents posted here in the past year and seen some Tejas related documentaries; sure the second edition is pretty impressive, but the current one is a solid aircraft.

Buy the F35!

 

[Imad.Khan]

Even if the Indian Military didn't achieve all of its objectives regarding LCA, the amount of experience gained and the knowledge procured is in itself priceless. So no i don't think the LCA project is a failure, in worst case it failed to achieve all of the objectives.

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

The incessant troll is back! Brace yourselves...

i already asked people to take their pick. Just becasue u dont like what u read, i am a troll?

Ludicrous

Thanks.

Design and development[edit]
Origins[edit]
During the 1950s, Hindustan Aircraft Limited (HAL) had developed and produced several types of trainer aircraft, such as the HAL HT-2, however elements within the firm were eager to expand into the then-new realm of supersonic fighter aircraft.[2] Around the same point, the Indian Government were in the process of formulating a new Air Staff Requirement for a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft to equipped the Indian Air Force (IAF).[3] However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank, a German aircraft designer who had designed numerous combat aircraft of the Luftwaffe while at Focke-Wulf during the Second World War.[4] Kurt was invited to relocate to India to establish and head the project to produce what would become India's first indigenous fighter aircraft. Upon arrival, he set about directing design work for the prospective fighter.[2][3][5]

In 1956, HAL formally commenced design work on the supersonic fighter project.[4][2] The Indian Government, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, authorised the development of the aircraft, stating that it would aid in India's development of a modern aircraft industry.[6] The first phase of the project sought to develop an airframe that would be suitable for travelling at supersonic speeds and could effectively perform combat missions as a fighter aircraft, while the second phase sought to design and assemble a domestically produced engine capable of propelling the type.[4] Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a 1.4/1.5 Mach number were quickly emphasised.[4]

During the development phase, HAL designed and constructed a full-scale two-seat wooden glider to act as a flying demonstrator. Designated as the HAL X-241, the glider replicated the subsequent production aircraft in terms of dimensions, control configuration and aerofoil sections. The wheel-brakes, air-brakes, flaps and retractable undercarriage were all actuated using compressed gas, there was sufficient gas storage on board to perform multiple actuations per flight.[7] On 3 April 1959, the X-241 flew for the first time, having been launched by aero-tow behind a Douglas Dakota Mk.IV BJ 449. A total of 86 flights were conducted prior to the X-241 receiving considerable damage as the result of a landing accident in which the nose undercarriage had failed to extend.[7][5]

On 24 June 1961, the first prototype Marut conducted its maiden flight.[3][5] The prototype was powered by the same Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojet engines that had powered the Folland Gnat, which was also being manufactured by HAL at point in time. On 1 April 1967, the first production aircraft was officially delivered to the IAF.[5] While originally intended only as an interim measure during testing, HAL decided to power production models of the Marut with a pair of unreheated Orpheus 703 engines, using which the aircraft could not attain supersonic speeds.[3] Although it had been originally conceived to operate in the vicinity of Mach 2, the Marut in fact turned out to be barely capable of reaching Mach 1 due to the lack of suitably powered engines for the airframe.[3][8]

The IAF were reluctant to procure a fighter aircraft that was only marginally superior to its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunter fighters; however, in 1961, the Indian Government decided to procure 16 pre-production aircraft and 60 series production Maruts as well.[5] Only 147 aircraft, including 18 two-seat trainers, were completed out of an initial target of 214 aircraft.[3] After the Indian Government conducted its first nuclear tests at Pokhran, international pressure prevented the import of better engines, or at times, even spares for the Orpheus engines used; this situation was one of the main reasons for this aircraft's early demise. The Marut had never realised its full potential due to insufficient power. According to author Amit Gupta, the Marut "was technically obsolete by the time it was first delivered in 1964".[3] Other authors have also commented on the Marut's relative obsolesce by the time it had reached production.[9]

Termination and criticisms[edit]
According to aviation author Chris Smith, the Marut was "essentially a very long-drawn-out failure", he attributes the aircraft's shortcomings to multiple factors.[10] Amongst these were the difficulties experienced in securing a suitable engine, which was principally a political issue; while arrangements were successfully established with the United Kingdom and Bristol Siddeley to domestically produce the Orpheus engine by HAL, this engine was only suitable as an interim measure as it lacked the power to enable the Marut to achieve supersonic flight.[11] The Indian Government had refused a proposal made by Rolls-Royce to finance further development of the Orpheus, which had been specifically aimed at producing a more suitable model of the engine for the Marut.[11][3]

Other envisioned alternative engines that could have potentially been sourced from the Soviet Union, Egypt and various European nations did not result in anything of substance.[3][12] The Gas Turbine Research Establishment also perused their own development program to improve the Orpheus without external aid, which proceeded to the testing phase with some favourable results, but proved to be incompatible with the Marut.[13] As the particularities of a given airframe are typically heavily dependent on the engine used, the inability to develop the Marut around a specific engine damaged its performance.[12] Despite experimentation with various engines, the Marut was never able to achieve supersonic speeds, which was viewed as a major failure of a project which at one point had ambitions to produce a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft.[4] The IAF had anticipated the Marut being fitted with a considerably superior engine.[13][14]

The project was negatively affected by a lack of direction and management from the Indian Ministry of Defence.[12] A lack of coordination between the military, politicians, and industry is alleged to have been typical throughout the entirety of the programme, leaving many issues down to industry alone without guidance. Specifically, the government never sanctioned the development of an engine design team, nor were there assessments of HAL's capability to reverse engineer or to apply technologies from other projects, such as the work performed for the Folland Gnat.[15] HAL is claimed to have struggled to convince both the IAF and MoD that the design of the Marut was acceptable; much attention was given to the unacceptably high level of trail drag that the airframe produced, as well as dissatisfaction of the Marut's speed and manoeuvrability, both of which were below IAF standards upon its introduction.[12]

Kurt himself had a major influence on the project, and accordingly of its shortcomings. While working on the Marut, Kurt has been credited with having instructed his fellow engineers well during the project, but was also noted for his rigid stance on aspects of the design.[16] He typically had little interest in lobbying the Indian government for funding refinements to the design; elements of the IAF have been alleged to have held dismissive attitudes of Kurt and of his abilities, rarely coordinated with him on issues with the aircraft, which in turn exacerbating the type's performance issues.[15] The level of technological transfer between German and India on the project was subject to criticism as well.[17]

According to author Satish Kumar, the limited technological capabilities of Indian aerospace industry had created a heavy reliance on foreign technologies and imported components.[2] Kumar also attributes HAL's willingness to undertake overly-ambitious defence projects as being partially responsible for the project's outcome and the Marut's performance.[2] Author Amit Gupta observed that the Marut was not only heavily dependent on foreign-sourced materials, but that it was more expensive to manufacture the type in India than to have imported completed aircraft.[3] The level of indigenous components increased over time, reportedly having reached 70 per cent by December 1973.[5] The allocation of scarce resources to reproducing components that could have been readily acquired externally represented a high level of opportunity cost to India. According to Swarna Rajagopalan, India lacked the infrastructure and scientific base to successfully produce an effective indigenous combat aircraft at that time.[6]

The IAF reportedly showed little confidence in indigenous fighter technology, having openly expressed its preference for the French-built Dassault Ouragan as an alternative.[15] By the time the Marut was entering its mass production phase, the IAF had already purchased foreign-built fighters such as the Hawker Hunter and Sukhoi Su-7.[13] Following on from the Marut, HAL proceeded to produce larger quantities of both European and Soviet combat aircraft under license, such as the SEPECAT Jaguar, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21, and Mikoyan MiG-27.[18]

 

[Navin A]

awesome copy and paste skills, the Tejas is going fine and has been inducted and working on for further developments, we have gained a lot of skills and India is happy in total.

Now trolls and haters can take hike!

 

[nomi007]

defence.pk is major cause of failure

 

[StraightShooter]

As an R&D program LCA has some success but as a fighter plane it is a failure.

I would not hold my breath for its FOC.

 

[Mrc]

Any one calling tejas a failure will have brahmos (shuper shonic mijjile) ramed up his back side...

Final warning... let our neighbours sleep

 

[Sully3]

indians are claiming troll this and troll that but the biggest nail in Tejas coffin was when the indian navy chief himself came on record and rejected it.

No point picking fights with people on pdf being extra nationalist when your own navy chief thinks its a junk fighter.

 

[Tshering22]

Tejas is exactly like the HF-24 Marut program.

Failure or not? take your pick.

HF-24 Marut did its part in bombing the mickey out of our adversaries.

So yes. It sufficed at that point of time.

 

[deckingraj]

It's actually shuper duper extra shonic mijjile. Indians are very good on two things. 1) trolling on forums. 2) beating up defenceless women and children in Occupied Kashmir. I grew up watching these hijray terrorise us.

As for Tejas, it's okay to be nationalistic, but be reasonable too. The aircraft has been in development nearly 50 years. Navy has rejected it. Air Force has a handful. Even countries like Bangladesh Sri Lanka Afghanistan rejected it, do why the false bravado?

It's a failure when compared to JF-17 that started in late 80s, and not only is it being exported but is also up to version 3. But Indians can't swallow this.

I agree with you...Tejas is junk...and JF-17 is future....had we be not busy in beating up defenseless women and children we perhaps may have created 1/10th of JF-17....

 

[nang2]

Anything falls short of its original goal is a failure. A crappy product can be a success when it meets and even exceeds its original expectation. A fancy product can be a failure when it fails to do so.