Don't Want Or Need HAL's HTT-40 Trainer: IAF Chief

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Coalmine, Feb 7, 2013.

  1. Coalmine

    Coalmine Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    475
    Likes Received:
    319
    Location:
    India
    Don't Want Or Need HAL's HTT-40 Trainer: IAF Chief

    [​IMG]

    "There is no need for it (the HTT-40 turbo trainer project)," IAF chief Air Chief Marshal Norman Browne said in response to a question by me on a series of HAL projects that the IAF is deeply unhappy with.

    Confirming to me that the IAF has forwarded a recommendation to the government to shelf HAL's HTT-40 programme, the IAF chief said, "We have the Pilatus PC-7. It's a proven aircraft. The project HAL plans is from scratch. Our indications are that the costs will be too high. There is no need for all this."
     
  2.  
  3. LTE-TDD

    LTE-TDD Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    211
    Likes Received:
    20
    Haha, great HAL!
     
  4. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    doo doo doo, another HAL bites the dust.
     
  5. Coalmine

    Coalmine Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    475
    Likes Received:
    319
    Location:
    India
    Guys is there any response from Hal. Hal may develop on there own for H&D

    Trishul blog reporting that HAL intends to use Pratt and Whitney PT6 engines.
     
  6. mikhail

    mikhail Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    1,096
    Location:
    Land of Intolerance and App Wapsi
    at least they are trying their level best in developing state of the art arms and weaponry for the Indian Armed Forces!thats what really matters!
     
    datguy79 likes this.
  7. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    It is time to tell the DRDO that they have to wake up and smell the coffee and quit acting like public sector lumbering white elephants ordered to be humoured!
     
  8. Blackwater

    Blackwater Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Messages:
    20,992
    Likes Received:
    11,821
    Location:
    Akhand Bharat
    Both HAL and DRDO should be fully or partially privatise
     
  9. Rahul Singh

    Rahul Singh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    1,408
    Not undertaking HTT-40 project forward will mean repeating same HTT-35---> HPT-32--->Pilatus-7MKII story all over again.

    We all know that trainers are not like fighters and they wear far quickly than frontline fighters, especially the BPT kind. And in organization like IAF (which trains around 500 pilots yearly with each recording over 60 hours on BPT) it is like 30000 hours divided by 100 (maximum possible operational BPTs in IAF at any time) equals to 300 hours on each BPT per year. Now add to it routine test flights (flown for the purpose of system validation after routine maintenance and occasional breakdowns) in addition to number of hours flown by instructors for training new instructor trainees.

    For what i can estimate, BPT's life expectancy is not much more than 20-25 years in general. And even if PC-7 MKII is advance, it will surely require life extension upgrade (possibly including engine replacement) after 20 years. Since they are SWIS made, HAL is out of equation. So who will IAF go for upgrade? Surely Pilatus? Considering high labor cost as one of many cost escalating reasons, one can easily estimate how much MILKING ( you heard it twice, don't you) IAF will do then of tax payer's sack?

    In contrast, if HTT-40 is given go ahead even as a slow 10 year project then by that time (20-22 years from now) IAF would at least have an option of buying a new BPT in place of old PC-7 MKIIs -- requiring heavy up-gradation-- which might just turn out be costlier (in terms of money spent for gaining X hours of air frame life).
     
  10. Rahul Singh

    Rahul Singh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    1,408
    Not undertaking HTT-40 project forward will mean repeating same HTT-35---> HPT-32--->Pilatus-7MKII story all over again.

    We all know that trainers are not like fighters and they wear far quickly than frontline fighters, especially the BPT kind. And in organization like IAF (which trains around 500 pilots yearly with each recording over 60 hours on BPT) it is like 30000 hours divided by 100 (maximum possible operational BPTs in IAF at any time) equals to 300 hours on each BPT per year. Now add to it routine test flights (flown for the purpose of system validation after routine maintenance and occasional breakdowns) in addition to number of hours flown by instructors for training new instructor trainees.

    For what i can estimate, BPT's life expectancy is not much more than 20-25 years in general. And even if PC-7 MKII is advance, it will surely require life extension upgrade (possibly including engine replacement) after 20 years. Since they are SWIS made, HAL is out of equation. So who will IAF go for upgrade? Surely Pilatus? Considering high labor cost as one of many cost escalating reasons, one can easily estimate how much MILKING ( you heard it twice, don't you) IAF will do then of tax payer's sack?

    In contrast, if HTT-40 is given go ahead even as a slow 10 year project then by that time (20-22 years from now) IAF would at least have an option of buying a new BPT in place of old PC-7 MKIIs -- requiring heavy up-gradation-- which might just turn out be costlier (in terms of money spent for gaining X hours of air frame life).
     

Share This Page