IAF diluted al least 12 benchmarks for trainer aircraft

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Twinblade, Jul 30, 2013.

  1. Twinblade

    Twinblade Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    2,414
    http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/iaf-diluted-al-least-12-benchmarks-for-trainer-aircraft-113072901068_1.html

    Different standards for domestic and imported products. Haven't we heard this before.
     
  2.  
  3. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Location:
    EST, USA
    What I have noticed with arms procurement:
    • Requirements remain unheard of for years, and they suddenly pop-up the moment a foreign made item is available.
    • Quite surprisingly, the capabilities of that foreign made item closely matches the requirements.
    • A cavalcade of "experts" throng defense sites, and scratch each others' backs while promoting these foreign items.
     
    SPIEZ, Sridhar, Kunal Biswas and 6 others like this.
  4. Twinblade

    Twinblade Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    2,414
    What particularly irks me is the audacity and impunity with which these differential standards are maintained. Agreed that product lifecycle support is something that domestic suppliers are not particularly known for, but there has to be a level playing field to compete on.
     
  5. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,663
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Location:
    EST, USA
    I would be a bit more radical. The moment a new requirement pops up out of nowhere, the persons involved are shown the door or demoted. My message to these "experts" would be: "If you do not have foresight, get back to the level of a sepoy."
     
    SPIEZ, Sridhar, Kunal Biswas and 2 others like this.
  6. rvjpheonix

    rvjpheonix Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    169
    Location:
    india
    @Twinblade can the HTT 40 complete all the requirements of the new ASQR?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  7. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,043
    Location:
    New Delhi
    This is the standard procedure of IAF. They make unrealistic PSQRs for HAL which are difficult to comply with and then go to MOD to ask for imports. That is what they did in the case of LCA and that is what they have done for AMCA and this trainer. It is all a game of bribes and nothing else. You might recall when this deal was signed, this deal was a thanks giving to swiss authorities to help Italian waitress hide her swiss money and to deny providing details of the people who held accounts in the swiss banks before 2010.
     
  8. Twinblade

    Twinblade Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    2,414
    Its a product under development. Maybe it can, maybe it can't, maybe its a piece of crap, maybe it can do 20G negative loops while blasting Auld Lang Syne from megaphones, but that's not the issue at hand. If you maintain stiff procurement guidelines for one set of suppliers while diluting the guidelines for another set beyond what can be considered in good faith, its a case of straightforward malevolent behaviour.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    rvjpheonix likes this.
  9. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,665
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Basically there are two important questions that come to my mind immediately on reading this article

    1.What I would like to know, was HAL given the same set of revised ASQR and what was their reaction to it??

    2. What is the time frame from HAL to deliver the trainer to IAF??

    The second point is very important and probably has a bearing on the decision.
     
  10. TrueSpirit

    TrueSpirit Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,891
    Likes Received:
    824
    Location:
    Forget It....Trace my IP if you can
    But Sir, the MMRCA requirement & evaluation was a genuine one, right ? HAL could not have offered the platform with capabilities that IAF needs, in a reasonable timeframe...
     
  11. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,043
    Location:
    New Delhi
    If only IAF had not made unrealistic PSQRs for LCA way back in 1983, we wud not have had the need to import MMRCA. We cud have the LCA and than modified/evolved it to suit whichever role we needed it to perform.
     
    ersakthivel and navkapu like this.
  12. navkapu

    navkapu Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    39
    This is so correct I support you completely, Would like to add "Tanks are destroyed by RPG & IED" we need to induct arms and keep developing and evolving..... awesomely put there are so many incidences where imported arms have not worked ...... we should think......... let the soldiers evolve these arms not babus .... thats what Israel has Done....
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2013
  13. ersakthivel

    ersakthivel Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    6,456
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Location:
    Erode
    There is really no point in giving a diluted ASR for HAL at 2009. Because by the time HAL would have configured the HTT-40 according to the earlier ASR.

    And it is not easy to redesign a flying platform at the drop of the hat.IAF knows this fully well.

    First by giving janes defence weekly specs hobble the design effort.Even if the designing agency comes close to achieve it, add newer demands citing new developments to make sure the product won't be delivered on time with the required reliability.

    Then complain the local product is shit and go for imports. And say ,"to avoid single vendor situation we have diluted requirements",.

    If people ask why did you give the same diluted ASR to local designers, say , "we have just give it a few years back", to make it seem as if it they are providing level plating ground to all.

    Import diluted foreign stuff and kill the local defence effort.

    then all the bright guys in the local development team frustrated with this scam will become rife picking for global majors ensuring brain drain.

    This has been repeated time and again, be it Arjun or Lca or any other local effort.

    The time frame given to HAL depends upon the design effort to be made for the much more stringent original PSQR and it will naturally exceed the target set by IAF. Because that is the original idea behind giving such demanding PSQRS namely snare the local design team in a time consuming design effort by demanding the world beating standards all in one platform to ensure they miss the deadline.

    Right thinking person will give a much lesser set of specs to local product in the first go to get a simple product going into service.

    But I don't blame the IAF or IA alone for it. It is the civilians higher up in the UPA government , who nudge the forces to get and then walk off with pay off with out soling their name, putting the blame on the IAF or the IA.

    They just put a man who is responsive to such demands and ease things off. You can say the same footprint in each and every single defence purchase by this government. Bleed billions of dollars of forex reserves, finish off the local design effort and the potential export dollars from such products, feather their swiss bank account nest .

    That is why many countries have laws that only citizens born there are eligible for high decision making posts. But we cannot even do that here.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2013
    Sridhar, rvjpheonix and pmaitra like this.
  14. TrueSpirit

    TrueSpirit Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,891
    Likes Received:
    824
    Location:
    Forget It....Trace my IP if you can
    You have a point..
     
    Kunal Biswas likes this.
  15. ersakthivel

    ersakthivel Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    6,456
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Location:
    Erode
    The radar they asked for LCA was as big as RAFLE's. And they changed their missile specs to much higher weight , higher launch stress inducing WVR missiles in 2004 , leading to complete redesign of the wing in FSED-phase -2 in 2004. Now a refueling probe, fully internal EW suit(incidentaly no single fighter in IAf has one when inducted) and specs that are picked from the best of MIg-29 and Mirage-2000, All incrementally .then moan the fact that we are waiting for the fighter for three decades!!!!!.

    Even after miracle of miracles ADA some how drags the LCA to IOC-1 call it a mig-21++ and say it is a ceremonial IOC.

    Why should a serving IAF chief call a fighter,

    1. that carries a RAFALE sized radar ,

    2,with the capacity to integrate 120 km range same Meteor BVR missile ,

    3.with the least clean config RCS among IAF fighters,

    4. With higher thrust to weight ratio and wing loading than the Mirage-2000 ,

    meaning a better ITR, crucial in quicker launching of high off bore sight WVR missiles at the first pass ,

    the most important thing in close combat,

    a MIG-21 ++ on red letter IOC day in front of all the global media?

    Which other fighter in IAF has all of these qualitied rolled into one in a highly demanding ASR?

    Then just give a 40 fighters in number order for mk-1 , jinxing any fast paced full blown production line of over 24 fighters a year,

    And give a even more demanding ASR for the mk-2 , that too with just 84 fighters ordered!!!!.

    Don't they know low in number order will automatically result in higher import content and higher cost due to economies of scale?

    If you buy RAFALE you dangle the number 160 + 60 , and for PAKFA 160 +64. But when it comes to Arjun or tejas ration the order in such a manner that local production never stabilizes and no meaning ful contribution from local industry.

    TheTATAs are making body panels for American helos, just because of the higher number of orders and a definite order visibility.

    The forces deny this important criterian for private player participation by making clouds hanging forever over local products.So no private player is going to put the money in for production line despite repeated entreaties from DRDO.

    A case in point is the close down production line of MRF factory which made the Arjun rubber tracks,.

    By repeatedly playing the same game the criminal politico- forces nexus have snuffed off the prospect of local arms designing capacity and any chance of export dollars for the industry all with an ulterior motive of feathering their swiss bank nest.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2013
  16. navkapu

    navkapu Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    39
    The IAF Chief who called it 21++ was from transport not fighters.....
     
  17. ersakthivel

    ersakthivel Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    6,456
    Likes Received:
    6,647
    Location:
    Erode
    If at all IAF goes to Sukhoi and asks for S ducts to conceal the exposed engine blades for PAKFA and asked Russian tank making units to deliver T-90 with internalized AC and compartmentalized ammo storage along with net centric capability, both the products will never see service in IAf and IA.

    PAKFA is going to have hundred times bigger RCS than the F-22 which saw service a decade back(and may even have a higher RCS than the RD-93 powered chinese J-31!!!! judging by the looks), but IAF won't utter a word in public, all the while lying through their teeth that Indian version of PAKFA i.e FGFA to be '"co -designed!!!!!!!" by HAL will be much better than the russian original.

    The ugly reality is the Indian FGFA is going to have western avionics because the Russain avionics are inferior and below the IAF standards and other than that HAL is not even going to redesign a single screw of FGFA to reduce it's RCS. SO FGFA is simply MKI zed PAKFA . Thats all.

    But they will repeatedly tighten the PSQR for AMCA three times from 2002 to 2012 and same is the case with Arjun , and give orders in low ration batches effectively making them still born. net result is ADA and GTRE going on a wild goose chase in thier effort to exceed the Sukhoi and match the US in their first attempt at 5th gen fighter!!!!!!!!. GTRE going for out of the world 75/ 100 kn engine thrust requirement with a engine TWR ratio exceeding 10, while chinese J-31 flies with decades old RD-93 engine.

    Why can't IAF show some pragmatism to allow a achievable tech level indian made 5th gen fighter to join the service and complement the russain FGFA? Haven't they been doing it for years in a MIg-21 - Su-30 team?

    And then why don't they ask ADA to improve the AMCA in tranches like F1, F2, F3 standards in RAFALE and tranches in TYPHOON and Blks in F-16? By delaying the finalizing of ASR and putting forth time consuming design demand s they make sure the design effort overshoot the time frame.

    The net result is by the time taken by IAF to issue the third final upgrade ASR by 2012 for AMCA , the chinese have built and flown two 5th gen fighters!!!!!!!!
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2013
    TrueSpirit likes this.
  18. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,043
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Its easy to blame HAL. No one ever allowed HAL to make an aircraft as they deemed fit. Pilatus made an aircraft and then we changed our PSQRs to meet them. So you had a ready off the shelf product available for tons of bribes.
    try changing the design of a house midway thru the construction and you will know why HAL has failed. HAL did not fail, they have been made to fail.
    This reminds me of a joke, once a hindu, a muslim and a sikh died and went to the doors of heaven. The door keeper did not want the sikh to get in so he put a series of questions to the three. he asked Hindu to add 2+2, four came the reply, he than asked muslim to add 3+3, six came the answer, he than asked the sikh to recite 19 ka pahada.
    The sikh protested and asked for something in english, so the door keeper asked the hindu and the muslim to spell out Cat & Rat and asked Sikh to spell Czechoslovakia. Sikh again failed.
    Finally the sikh asked to be examined on religious matters. The Hindu was asked to name the Tridev of Hinduism, the muslim was asked to give the two names of Prophet, sikh was asked to name the 33 crore hindu gods.

    Needless to say the outcome of such an exam but this conveys a point. HAL in this case has been treated like the Sikh of this joke.
     
  19. TrueSpirit

    TrueSpirit Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,891
    Likes Received:
    824
    Location:
    Forget It....Trace my IP if you can
    Sir, this sounds very convincing & makes sense.

    However, not being an insider & relying on filtered reports/viewpoints has kept me completely confused regarding our indigenization efforts.

    Indicting Armed forces leadership as bribe-hungry folks in all discussions & omnipresent sweeping allegations of corruption against them sounds really big deal (over-stepping) to me. Maybe, we don't really know enough to be able to form a right judgement. Maybe, DPSU's &/or some private players are influential enough to be able to be able to colour our views about the Armed forces leadership :frusty:

    It is impossible to me to be able to understand whether the armed forces leadership & Def. Min. are at fault in this aspect, or it is our DPSU's.

    Especially, getting regularly bombarded by persuasive arguments on DFI from both sides of the divide since 4 years has served only to confuse me even more.

    As far as I can see, @p2prada & @Armand2REP :) are decisively pro-armed forces leadership & anti-DPSU, while @Decklander @Kunal Biswas @ersakthivel @pmaitra, @sayareakd are pro-DPSU & indigenization through private industry participation. I am not sure about @Ray Sir's stand on this.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  20. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    My view is that the HAL has failed India in many areas starting from the most modern aircraft of those time HF 24.

    They alone are not to blame.

    It is the foolish Govt which has failed India!
     
  21. TrueSpirit

    TrueSpirit Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,891
    Likes Received:
    824
    Location:
    Forget It....Trace my IP if you can
    Is it that IAF leadership (& IA, as well, in most cases) does not know about the basics of project-management (like, having something called "freezing of requirements"), which sounds quite improbable.

    The other possibility is that they consider themselves to be somehow entitled to loot the nation (on the lines of politicians, bureaucrats & everyone else when presented with an opportunity). This would imply that our armed forces are no different from civilians especially when they make it to the top hallowed echelons of leadership, which is disastrous since in that case, the last institution that stood for probity has already been breached & crumbled by creeping of ordinary human vices in Armed Forces' professional conduct.

    And, if the latter is the case, we are indeed a nation of rogues & thieves (not much better than the wretched Pakis).

    Morality, in our case, is just a lack of opportunity.
     

Share This Page