HAL's trainer Rs 4,500 crore cheaper than Swiss Pilatus trainer

[Decklander]

Yes, The weapon training is imparted during stage-3 only.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Are you kidding me? HAL is pushing for a first flight before 2015, not delivery. Their current claim is that IAF should place order for the next 37 PC-7s only if HTT-40 flies after 2015. If it flies before 2015, IAF should place an order for HTT-40. However they are not counting the delays that come in from the time negotiations take place and contract is signed. If IAF begins the process for the 37 fighters today, the contract will be signed before 2014 and Pilatus will be able to manufacture the aircraft for delivery as soon as the 75 are delivered. HTT-40 will take much more than 2015 if first flight happens even in 2014.

Hey Hey Hey stop jumping, where did i said 2015 is induction date?

Interesting, then where is Sitara? Flew in 2003 first.

I don't know if HAL has shared any plans with you or not about flying HTT-40 prototypes with one engine and LSPs with still to be developed engine . Kindly share if you have any such information. Thank You!

Lol. Simple math. Calculate Pilatus price at 2% contract based inflation versus HTT-40 costs at 10% inflation well after it flies in 2014 or even 2015.

Like i said competent authority.

Anyway Math or no math even at twice the quoted price of HTT-40 country loses only 6-12 crores but when country buys Pilatus it loses all 38.5 crores. That's the economics and matters much for a growing economy.

BTW if calculation of LCC had been based on provided inflation figure MOD would have outright rejected HAL's figure.

That's nationalistic nonsense. IAF buys products for the country. HAL sells for profit. It is not about HAl or the country. It is about IAF.

How stupid! Where does HAL's profit goes, into chairman's account or national depositary/economy?

Don't tell me you buy phones and computers "for the country."

Not just that, even soaps, shampoos and deos"¦"¦"¦ ever heard of punch line "Alive is Awesome".

We can survive a loss of one or two billions.

Colonized mind's nonsense logic. In that two billion we can give full term job opportunities to thousands of Indians and earn taxes form their earnings and yet IAF will have BTT unlike otherwise where there will be complete loss except the BTT.

If that was not enough, MODs earning is FM earning, FMs earning is nation's earning, Nation's earning is nation's deep pocket, nation's deep pocket is grater budget allocation next time for IAF.

There are very very few things worth Indian that are worth buying and these are bought. Most of what we produce is worthless.

Then commit to HTT-40 and increase that percentage.

This is nothing different from what has been happening before
The services have always needed approval from DRDO/HAL/DARE etc before importing. They have always provided thorough explanation for why they cannot place their hopes on a non-existent HTT-40 against a being delivered PC-7. .

Only more stringent with lot of clarity and with quite an impulse.

Now that we have already decided on PC-7, there is simply no need to buy another trainer that does the same thing.

MOD decides that.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Lot of you can argue endlessly about a non existant ac v/s an ac available off the shelf. But HTT-40 was suggested long long back and cud not take off due to IAF not backing it.
IAF will never allow any Indian made weaponised trainer ac to be built in India as they are shit scared of IA & IN setting up their own training academies which will dilute the importance of IAF.

HAL has proposed BTT in the form of HTT-35 back in early 80s. This HTT-40 is just modernised proposal due to time lapse. In reality IAF is sleeping over BTT proposal since last three decades.

 

[p2prada]

Hey Hey Hey stop jumping, where did i said 2015 is induction date?

You said you will support HAL's 2015 date.

I don't know if HAL has shared any plans with you or not about flying HTT-40 prototypes with one engine and LSPs with still to be developed engine . Kindly share if you have any such information. Thank You!

I actually didn't get your point here.

Like i said competent authority.

Where will you get that from?

Anyway Math or no math even at twice the quoted price of HTT-40 country loses only 6-12 crores but when country buys Pilatus it loses all 38.5 crores. That's the economics and matters much for a growing economy.

This matters more when Tata makes cars and nobody buys it.

Military follows an entirely different policy of profit and loss.

Think logically, PC-7s today or HTT-40 a decade from now.

BTW if calculation of LCC had been based on provided inflation figure MOD would have outright rejected HAL's figure.

Which they did.

How stupid! Where does HAL's profit goes, into chairman's account or national depositary/economy?

HALs pocket. They use profits to expand or invest into R&D.

Not just that, even soaps, shampoos and deos"¦"¦"¦ ever heard of punch line "Alive is Awesome".

I don't get your point here.

Colonized mind's nonsense logic. In that two billion we can give full term job opportunities to thousands of Indians and earn taxes form their earnings and yet IAF will have BTT unlike otherwise where there will be complete loss except the BTT.

Which mobile do you use? Micromax or one of the fangled phoren maal?
Car? I do hope you have a Maruti, Mahindra or a Tata. Hyundai or Honda, then don't reply.
Fridge? Washing machine?

I doubt you are 100% desi either.

If that was not enough, MODs earning is FM earning, FMs earning is nation's earning, Nation's earning is nation's deep pocket, nation's deep pocket is grater budget allocation next time for IAF.

There are a million other "better" ways.

Then commit to HTT-40 and increase that percentage.

A Billion won't do much in such a project. Most of it will go into the plane itself.

MOD decides that.

Let's see, shall we?

 

[pmaitra]

Sources revealed that the deal had to be delayed in order to address the flaws in the proposal pinpointed by HAL. There was serious concern that these issues could later come under the scrutiny of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India and lead to an embarrassing situation for the defence ministry.

Quoting from this post: http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...-than-swiss-pilatus-trainer-4.html#post717575

 

[pmaitra]

Anyway Math or no math even at twice the quoted price of HTT-40 country loses only 6-12 crores but when country buys Pilatus it loses all 38.5 crores. That's the economics and matters much for a growing economy.

My money is on HAL. Now that you mentioned that IAF was sleeping on the HAL HTT-35 since the 80s, I am beginning to wonder now that the Pilatus is on offing, why is IAF suddenly so interested in it? Also, since HAL HTT-35 is already there for a while, HAL might actually deliver HAL HTT-40 on time.

How stupid! Where does HAL's profit goes, into chairman's account or national depositary/economy?

Pilatus - 100% of the money goes out of the country.
HAL - With R&D, the money will be spent on local hardware, scientists' salaries, and some foreign hardware as well, so some or most of the money will remain in India.

 

[Rahul Singh]

You said you will support HAL's 2015 date.

Somewhere it is written order more Pilatus if HTT does not fly by 2015 I guess it is anything but full induction.

I actually didn't get your point here.

Try again!

Where will you get that from?

Easy, Defence ministry.

This matters more when Tata makes cars and nobody buys it.

Military follows an entirely different policy of profit and loss.

Think logically, PC-7s today or HTT-40 a decade from now.

75 Pilatus, they fly in shifts to make up for less numbers (considering Pilatus is a really good aircraft with less turn around time as vouched) while in meantime HTT-40 is developed and provided? IAF is benefited so is rest of the country. A win win in place of win lose. Think logically.

Which they did.

As per Ajai Shikla, it is due.

HALs pocket. They use profits to expand or invest into R&D.

Oh! woh! who owns HAL? Mr, Tyagi or taxpayer?

I don't get your point here.

Read what it was replied to?

Which mobile do you use? Micromax or one of the fangled phoren maal?
Car? I do hope you have a Maruti, Mahindra or a Tata. Hyundai or Honda, then don't reply.
Fridge? Washing machine?

I doubt you are 100% desi either.

That's the root of the problem, you only listens to yourself.....You will bite yourself of if i give you details.

There are a million other "better" ways.

Which is topped by the desi option.

A Billion won't do much in such a project. Most of it will go into the plane itself.

No it won't. Other thing is, the real life exposser it will provide to green engineers would pay multiple times in future.

Let's see, shall we?

Did not i said that?

 

[Rahul Singh]

My money is on HAL. Now that you mentioned that IAF was sleeping on the HAL HTT-35 since the 80s, I am beginning to wonder now that the Pilatus is on offing, why is IAF suddenly so interested in it? Also, since HAL HTT-35 is already there for a while, HAL might actually deliver HAL HTT-40 on time.l

HTP-32 retired prematurely but was due to retire around present time anyway. Question is why did not IAF prepared in advance, why it keep sleeping over untill situation became desperate -- which was then used as a reason to take foreign route?

Pilatus - 100% of the money goes out of the country.
HAL - With R&D, the money will be spent on local hardware, scientists' salaries, and some foreign hardware as well, so some or most of the money will remain in India.

True and also the exposser it will provide to green engineers who are supposed to be part of the team which will work on projects like FGFA, AMCA AURA etc. Some say success is climbed to with ladder not elevator, i agree.

 

[p2prada]

Somewhere it is written order more Pilatus if HTT does not fly by 2015 I guess it is anything but full induction.

How is first flight = full induction?

2015 first flight would be followed by flight testing for at least 2 - 3 years followed by a 2 year build cycle where they will setup assembly lines and such.

Even with the most optimistic dates, delivery will happen sometime between 2018 and 2020, counting our wonderful delays. PC-7 delivery is happening "today" and will end with 182 example even before the first HTT-40 is delivered.

Easy, Defence ministry.

You won't get that. 10% inflation is enough to squash HAL's claims.

75 Pilatus, they fly in shifts to make up for less numbers (considering Pilatus is a really good aircraft with less turn around time as vouched) while in meantime HTT-40 is developed and provided? IAF is benefited so is rest of the country. A win win in place of win lose. Think logically.

What I am saying is that the HTT-40 won't be ready in time. First flight is not induction, especially in the Indian context.

As per Ajai Shikla, it is due.

Very professional analysis. He's turning more and more into a DRDO loudspeaker than a real journalist.

Oh! woh! who owns HAL? Mr, Tyagi or taxpayer?

HAL's money is HALs.

Read what it was replied to?

You don't buy stuff "for the country" you buy it "for yourself."

Which is topped by the desi option.

Far from it.

No it won't. Other thing is, the real life exposser it will provide to green engineers would pay multiple times in future.

There are other HAL projects that will pay multiple times. Let them fix the Sitara first, then we will talk about HTT-40.

Nobody gives a company another development project when they aren't even close to delivery on the first one.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Sitara is operational in IAF..

I think what meant is Improved and Weaponized Sitara on the way..

 

[p2prada]

Even AMCA is operational. So is AURA.

 

[pmaitra]

HTP-32 retired prematurely but was due to retire around present time anyway. Question is why did not IAF prepared in advance, why it keep sleeping over untill situation became desperate -- which was then used as a reason to take foreign route?

Maybe they were waiting for an opportunity to get another foreign deal, and who knows, some hidden commission? IAF alone is responsible for creating this panic like situation. Why blame HAL?

True and also the exposser it will provide to green engineers who are supposed to be part of the team which will work on projects like FGFA, AMCA AURA etc. Some say success is climbed to with ladder not elevator, i agree.

Some people will never acknowledge that. Looks like India being able to stand on its own feet is not a desirable priority for IAF.

 

[p2prada]

Source? Him? Ha ha ha - he even claimed Pilatus does not come with hard-points, and then I posted the company flyer from Pilatus website, and he never responded back to that.

Quit misleading people here.

Your comprehension ability speaks for itself.

Please point out where I said Pilatus does not come with Hardpoints at all????

I never said anything of the sort that indicates PC-7s "never" came with hardpoints.

Go back a few posts where I said something and you replied with a "Inane hocus-pocus." comment.

Nevermind, since you won't understand what I am talking about anyways, I will give more details.

Your post,

Do you understand we should be able to double them up as CAS if required?

My post,

Are we Chad, Afghanistan or Guatemala? PA is a very advanced army. PC-7s won't scare them.

PC-7s are and will be used for training purposes. Nothing else.

PC-7s are used for CAS when the enemy does not have fighter aircraft of their own. For eg: Taliban, Africans rebels etc. We can worry about it after we have completely annihilated PAF and PLAAF. So we can continue our discussion after both PAF and PLAAF are either disbanded or destroyed.

Your reply,

Inane hocus-pocus.

Do you even know why I named the countries, especially Chad and Guatemala? That's because unlike you I am aware of the small instances in history where PC-7 was used in combat. One was in Chad where the govt hit rebel forces. The other was in Guatemala where it was used in a civil war. Both the times PC-7s were used for CAS.

That's why I asked what I asked in my reply which you claimed to be Inane hocus-pocus.

Meaning I know instances where PC-7 supplied with hardpoints were used in actual combat. The reason why the Swedes removed permanent hardpoints was because of the Iran-Iraq war where the Iraqis dropped chemical weapons on the Iranians.

Now, if I know these important and significant aspects, how did you come to the conclusion that "I claimed" there are no hardpoints at all on the PC-7. I will tell you why, it is because you don't know jack-shit about anything related to the aerospace industry. What you replied with "Inane hocus-pocus" was very very relevant to the discussion, the times when PC-7 was actually used in combat, teh same thing that you were trying to say.

It is because you don't understand such simple facts, it is because you are unable to comprehend what I write here, it is because you don't know jack shit about military aircraft is the reason why I stopped replying to your posts. Kapish...

 

[p2prada]

I am lying about you? Ok. Who wrote this, you, or someone else logged into your account?

Pilatus did not place permanent hardpoints which carry heavy loads.

Can you see?

Edit: @Kunal Biswas,

Since you are moderating this thread, I apologize for posting this Pilatus stuff here. I did it to prove the false accusation against me by @p2prada, that I was lying about him. Please feel free to delete this post if you want.

[/quote]

And what is wrong with it?

Pilatus did not place permanent hardpoints on their aircraft. It is a fact. PC-7 Mk2 does not come with hardpoints. It is your comprehension ability, I can't help it. Meaning our aircraft do not come with hardpoints.

Only PC-7 comes with hardpoints and those were the aircraft used for CAS in Chad, Guatemala etc.

And in all your glory, you posted a pic of the PC-7 which IAF does not use. We purchased the PC-7 Mk2. You see it is a different aircraft altogether.

This is the reason why I stopped replying to your posts. You don't know jackshit and you keep proving it again and again.

 

[p2prada]

I have nothing more to add to this "fine gentleman's" continued prevarications.

I am really fed up of all this.

Haha! You posts help a lot with your credibility.

Now what was that about, "Source? Him? Ha ha ha - he even claimed Pilatus does not come with hard-points, and then I posted the company flyer from Pilatus website, and he never responded back to that."

I had posted this a long, long time ago to Dr. Somnath's rants when he claimed he had plenty of sources during our discussions.

"A source can be given, but the reader should have the ability to understand what the source says."

Wouldn't you agree?

You've been had, my man...again.

Cheerio.

 

[pmaitra]

Haha! You posts help a lot with your credibility.

Now what was that about, "Source? Him? Ha ha ha - he even claimed Pilatus does not come with hard-points, and then I posted the company flyer from Pilatus website, and he never responded back to that."

I stand by what I said. I went back to the Pilatus company website. I found nothing that backs up your claims. I have already backed up my claims, and everyone can see it.

I had posted this a long, long time ago to Dr. Somnath's rants when he claimed he had plenty of sources during our discussions.

Dr. Somnath has more credibility than you. He provides sources, and you, just a lot of hot air.

"A source can be given, but the reader should have the ability to understand what the source says."

First give the source, then we can think about "understanding" the source.

 

[p2prada]

I stand by what I said. I went back to the Pilatus company website. I found nothing that backs up your claims. I have already backed up my claims, and everyone can see it.

You can live with your fantasies.

Dr. Somnath has more credibility than you. He provides sources, and you, just a lot of hot air.

It is fine, I don't dispute his sources. I merely had a discussion with him where he did not understand what the source said.

First give the source, then we can think about "understanding" the source.

What source do you want?

IAF does not do weapons training at the basic level. What type of source do you want here?

Read Decklander's posts in the same thread. He pointed out weapons training happens in the advanced training segment. Is that enough?

You make up shit and want others to prove you wrong. Wah!

 

[pmaitra]

You can live with your fantasies.



It is fine, I don't dispute his sources. I merely had a discussion with him where he did not understand what the source said.



What source do you want?

IAF does not do weapons training at the basic level. What type of source do you want here?

Read Decklander's posts in the same thread. He pointed out weapons training happens in the advanced training segment. Is that enough?

You make up shit and want others to prove you wrong. Wah!

Your post responds to my post that asks for a source. As I read most of your post, looks like you are trying to do everything but addressing the main issue of the post you are responding to. The issue is "source."

See, more obfuscation and confusion, deliberately introduced by you.

You said this:

"A source can be given, but the reader should have the ability to understand what the source says."

Don't do it for me, but do it for other members at DFI. I am not asking you to send me an email lol, I am asking you to post your source here bored, so that all can see. Or do you think everyone else in DFI lacks the ability to understand?

 

[p2prada]

Your post responds to my post that asks for a source. As I read most of your post, looks like you are trying to do everything but addressing the main issue of the post you are responding to. The issue is "source."

See, more obfuscation and confusion, deliberately introduced by you.

You said this:

Don't do it for me, but do it for other members at DFI. I am not asking you to send me an email lol, I am asking you to post your source here bored, so that all can see. Or do you think everyone else in DFI lacks the ability to understand?

That's what I am saying. I can give source that have facts in them. I cannot give source for half-assed questions and made up nuances.

There is no source saying "IAF will not use PC-7 Mk2s for CAS." There is no source saying otherwise either. It just needs common sense. Like the PC-7 Mk2 do not come with hardpoints hence IAF does not need PC-7s for CAS since they were willing to purchase an aircraft without any permanent hardpoints.

PC-7 Mk2s only have two wet points for carrying drop tanks.
PC-7 have 6 weaponized hardpoints. PC-9 has 6 hardpoints too. PC-7 Mk2 is really a PC-9 with a considerably weaker engine and no permanent hardpoints, meant only for training. That's what we purchased.

Also, all our training units are located far far from the border and not even one of these has a real chance in surviving a high threat environment like PAF and PLAAF airspace. Hence even if the PC-7s came with hardpoints we wouldn't use it against them.

It was different in the 70s and 80s where detection capabilities of the enemy was sub par and small aircraft could penetrate such defences, now it is not possible.

All your questions you have asked to date require a bit of relevant knowledge and some common sense. You don't post pics of a PC-7 and then claim the version we ordered can come with hardpoints, especially since we "paid for them." Btw, this is "paid for them" claim. We never paid for PC-9s or PC-7s, we paid for PC-7 Mk2s. Totally different aircraft.

Decklander said weapons training happens in Stage 3, that's Advanced stage. Which means IAF does not need a weaponized BTA. Hence hardpoints on PC-7 are moot. See, common sense. Just need to apply a bit of it here.

Tell me where I can get a source for common sense?