ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

Which role suits LCA 'Tejas' more than others from following options?

  • Interceptor-Defend Skies from Intruders.

    Votes: 342 51.3%
  • Airsuperiority-Complete control of the skies.

    Votes: 17 2.5%
  • Strike-Attack deep into enemy zone.

    Votes: 24 3.6%
  • Multirole-Perform multiple roles.

    Votes: 284 42.6%

  • Total voters
    667
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Any word on how the LCA MK2 is progressing??? Plus, will the Navy get a (N) LCA MK2 Model???
Well, ADA is already in process of selecting up-thrust engine. They have already commenced design modification in engine bay with the help of virtual reality simulation. Since the decision on engine is still to be taken ADA is designing/modifying engine bay separately for both engine in parallel so that when selection is done, irrespective which one, the ADA will we done with design work. Second most important improvement in MK-2 will be AESA MMR and its development has already been commenced by LRDE. Except these, following improvement are expected in MK-2.

a. Modular avionics design.
b. New computers(as per some reports it has already been developed and flying on PV-3)
c. AESA MMR with terrain mapping for supporting low level interdiction missions.
d. Fully integrated active, passive sensors and deceives for enhancing LO features.
e. Datalink
f. Modification in airframe for reducing drag.
g. Fully integrated EW suit.

Navy has already ordered 6 N-LCA MK-2
Business Standard has learnt that the navy has okayed the placement of an order for six Naval LCAs. At an approximate cost of Rs 150 crore per aircraft, that will provide a Rs 900 crore infusion into the Naval LCA programme
link
-------------------------------------

i am awaiting the next LSP, LSP5 was promised my june end, but did not arise, maybe the team was busy with this one, waiting to see the next AF one with full IOC standard equip eagerly
LSP-5 has not been held-up because of NP-1 roll out rather it was, because it is undergoing cockpit redesign.
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
As for the (N) LCA being the most prevalent in Indian Naval Service. That maybe true yet I see it being used more in a Advance Training Role. Than the main component in Indian Carrier Airwings. Just to small and its payload is limited in Carrier Operations.
Its payload is not limited for the purpose it was built for "Fleet Air Defence" and "limited anti-shipping". As far as its small size concerned then i'll like to inform you again that its small size is considered as a huge very huge advantage as it allows more numbers abroad relatively small carriers .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nrj

pavanvenkatesh

New Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
i would like if the ADA should make Mk-2 a little bigger with slightly bigger wings for better payload and performance
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
New Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,309
i would like if the ADA should make Mk-2 a little bigger with slightly bigger wings for better payload and performance
Don't expect that to happen as this will require quite lot of testing :)
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Then it will be all new fighter jet not just Mk-2.

As far as developing a bigger, heavy payload carrying fighter is concerned then we have AMCA already on cards. And i think it is more logical to develop stealth/5 gen fighter than starting a 4.5 gen project at this time.
 

nrj

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
I doubt the Kaveri will make service. It has had and needs a great deal of development. In short if India wants to field the LCA MK2 and (N) LCA anytime soon. It will have to accept a US or European substitute.


As for the (N) LCA being the most prevalent in Indian Naval Service. That maybe true yet I see it being used more in a Advance Training Role. Than the main component in Indian Carrier Airwings. Just to small and its payload is limited in Carrier Operations.

I'm quite sure LCA MK II will be powered by Kaveri engine. As for US/European substitute, It won't be entire substitute for engine. GTRE will form JV with some company in obtaining required thrust from Kaveri for LCA MK II. Kaveri doesn't need great deal of development, its just underpowered for LCA payload. The engine exists.

@NLCA

NLCA won't be reality for another 4 years. So training platform will be Mig29K. And as Rahul rightly mentioned, being small is boon for NLCA. Other heavier fighters in future will do the their respective job. NLCA will be the base fighter & real force in IN fighter inventory. It also has multiple future use i.e. EW fighter, UCAV.
 

vijay jagannathan

New Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
178
Likes
10
Delay in finalising engine for Mark2 is really really frustrating. what is it now? undoubtedly they have had enough time to take the engines apart down to the last bolt for evaluation. I really hope its not the political angle again. If it is heaven help IAF.
It would have been really great and saved a lot of time if all the other naval prototypes would have flown with the new engines staightaway. instead its the 404IN again. I agree that the trainer versions need not have the thrust meant for the main versions.

Why is the GTRE not opening its mouth about Kaveri? atleast they can comeout with the russian test details.

The other point is the popularity of the canopy design of the trainer and naval versions could lead to redesign of the AF version cockpit and canopy. But ofcourse I am sure ADA is wise enough to know that looks are one thing and effectiveness is another. I am sure with the advent of EADS into the scheme of things the design is likely to be ironed out and more definitely than not the air intakes will be modified.

Did anyone notice that the air intakes in the NP-1 appeared larger or is it just me having an illusion?
 

vijay jagannathan

New Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
178
Likes
10
the TEJA LCA exists and will be known for its size and limited radar cross section. Trying to increase its size and playing around with its payload will be stupidity. in its final form and function it will really be a nasty surprise to the enemy in the sky. The goal must be to keep refining it till this is done. The Tejas is a product of india's experience with Gnat( sheer size and nimbleless), marut( airframe) and mirgae 2000( simple design yet the easiest to fly).
There is a purpose why it was designed to be small. Let us leave it that way and enjoy when it lights up the sky.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nrj

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Delay in finalising engine for Mark2 is really really frustrating. what is it now? undoubtedly they have had enough time to take the engines apart down to the last bolt for evaluation. I really hope its not the political angle again. If it is heaven help IAF.
There is a political angle inside and no doubt on that. Lot of people believe in commonality and standardization. Well considering logistical harmony, it is a good thing and helps forces positively. But one question arises out here, how judicious it is to delay prime for subsidiary? Lot many sees Kaveri, GTRE and DRDO's involvement in delay in engine selection. But i with absolutely no doubt claiming that IAF is deliberately delaying selection on the name of standardization with to be selected MRCA's engine.

It would have been really great and saved a lot of time if all the other naval prototypes would have flown with the new engines staightaway. instead its the 404IN again. I agree that the trainer versions need not have the thrust meant for the main versions.
A year ago i used to say similar things but changed my opinion thinking, how long whole project can be delayed just because of engine. At least flight testing this F-404 powered NP-1 will validate performance of various new technologies like LEVCON, new landing gear etc.

is the GTRE not opening its mouth about Kaveri? atleast they can comeout with the russian test details.
There is no need to open mouth as process is comprehensive and still going. BTW they have learned over time not to open mouth until things are done.

The other point is the popularity of the canopy design of the trainer and naval versions could lead to redesign of the AF version cockpit and canopy. But ofcourse I am sure ADA is wise enough to know that looks are one thing and effectiveness is another.
Indeed ADA and IAF is wise enough and know that drop nose and new canopy(which fascinates people because in combination it gives LCA, a MKI kind front look) offers drag affecting acceleration and speed negatively. BTW LEVCON is one from N-LCA program which can become stranded on AF-LCA, if during testing it is reveled that it reduces drag and adds to maneuverability.

anyone notice that the air intakes in the NP-1 appeared larger or is it just me having an illusion?
I also had similar feeling about size though it can still be illusion. But one thing is special that there is no auxiliary intake present on the side of main inlet of NP-1(see pic). And this is very surprising considering the fact that earlier it was reported that N-LCA will require relatively better acceleration because of small take-off distance and for that volume of air going to engine must be increased. For facilitating large volume of air it was decided to cut three auxiliary intakes on each main air intake.

 
Last edited:

vijay jagannathan

New Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
178
Likes
10
Has Mark 2 LCA become a facade for DRDO agencies buying time? To me it more certainly looks like that. Sorry I am being critical. I am a LCA supporter.

1. The MMR radar conceptualised in 1997 is no where in sight. the agency responsible for it is the hyderabad based the LRDE. Does anyone know the status? can someone also explain if MMR is AESA or PESA? or what is the inherent difference?is the MMR still being pursued or an AESA BEING PURSUED? ULIMATELY THE CURRENT STATUS IS an isreli radar had to be installed after all these years.

2. EW suite.responsibility rests with DARE(defense avionics research establishment). not much news about the progress of the so called Mayavi. again israelis have been pulled in. what is this talk of integrating this suite with JSF f-35? AGAIN WE ARE CITING tEJAS MARK 2 AS IF WITH mARK 2's APPEARNCE EVERYTHING WILL BECOME AVAILABLE INSTANTLY.

3. well I am sorry about this Kaveri bashing. of course the GTRE has opened its big mouth and bitten off too big a chunk to swallow but come on. the GTRE chief as recently as March 2010 that the Kaveri will be flight tested in the latter half of June 2010. The latest news coming from various credible sources indicates a lot of differing opinion about the influence of snecma which of course would only be too willing to make the most of this situation. Snecam's involvement doesn't appear to promise a engine with the desired minimum thrust of 95-100 KN thrust and this is the reality however bitter it is to swallow.the current equation thus is as follows

Kaveri-snecma= engine for indian navy
kaveri+snecma= hybrid engine =GE4040 IN20 in performance.

so where is the need for snecma??? have they given us Single crystal technology?? No. are we close to mastering it-NO!! there were stray reports that DRDO has got the technology. that is absolutely not the truth. will they deliver an engine with required thrust-only on paper. frankly the presence of snecma is only delaying the inevitable.

yes there are positives from the project and we may get a decent plane BUT on critical technological issues we have not only failed to develop but sadly we have also failed to address prudently. What would have been the fate of Tejas without Israel? Has Wait for mark 2 become a convenient excuse for the DRDO angencies?? don't tell me XY AND Z took 50 years to develop that and 80 years to develop this. It seems likely mark 2 is a convenient excuse for many.
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Aeronautical Development Agency to bring in advisor for Tejas Mark-2

Praveena Sharma / DNAFriday, July 9, 2010 2:00 IST

Bangalore: After the rollout of the prototype of the light combat aircraft (LCA) Navy - NP1 early this week, Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) is now looking at finalising an aerospace partner for the development of its advanced prototype — Tejas Mark-2.

The LCA Tejas is being developed in two variants for the Indian Air Force and Navy by the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), ADA and Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

Commodore C D Balaji, director-LCA Navy-ADA, told DNA Money the state-run defence aerospace firm would be appointing a consultant for the Tejas Mark-2 in the next couple of months. Since ADA's negotiation with US-based Lockheed Martin, which had qualified for the consultancy of the LCA Tejas, has failed, it would be European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) that would be brought in to advise it on the programme.
Balaji said ADA would get in an aerospace expert to resolve issues on weight of the aircraft, location of the arrester and other such technical issues in the Tejas Mark-2 programme.

"We have been conservative in our design and development of the LCA NP1 and NP2 (Air Force version), but would like to optimise them in the future prototypes (Tejas Mark1 and Mark2). We will need experienced firms for this," said Balaji.

He said ADA was taking "baby steps" in LCA project and was apprehensive about it. "It (LCA Navy) is weaker than the required in some areas," said the ADA's director.

Simultaneously, ADA is also in the process of the selecting engines for the LCA Tejas for which it had sent out request for proposal (RFP) to General Electric (GE) for its F-414 and Eurojet for its EJ200.

Balaji said both the engines are technically compliant and their financial bid was under evaluation. He said after the down selection of the engines, the design and aero-structure of the LCA could be required to be modified.

Defence aerospace experts believe ADA would need help of a global aerospace partner to accelerate the pace of the programme and quickly resolve complicated technical issues.

"Once they (ADA) move to developing the new variants (for the LCA),they will need help in areas such as determining the location and attachment of the arrester hook system on aircraft, ways to test the arrester hook system, aerodynamic fixes to improvetakeoff and landing performance on the carrier, optimising the landing gear design to handle larger operating weight,recommend alternative engine with higher thrust to enhance thrust-to-weight ratio and making associated changes in the aircraft's structural configuration forreduction of weightby 500 kg and integration of operational payload on the aircraft," said an expert.

The Indian Navy requires over 50 aircraft and has ordered for six till now.
 

ppgj

New Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
Has Mark 2 LCA become a facade for DRDO agencies buying time? To me it more certainly looks like that. Sorry I am being critical. I am a LCA supporter.
why do you think so??

1. The MMR radar conceptualised in 1997 is no where in sight. the agency responsible for it is the hyderabad based the LRDE. Does anyone know the status? can someone also explain if MMR is AESA or PESA? or what is the inherent difference?is the MMR still being pursued or an AESA BEING PURSUED? ULIMATELY THE CURRENT STATUS IS an isreli radar had to be installed after all these years.
LSP 3 was flown with indian MMR Radar in April 2010. it is pulse doppler, mechanically steered multi mode radar. it is very similar to israeli EL-2032, french RDY 2, russian ZHUK ME Radars. the only israeli component in the indian version is the processor which is similar to the one in EL 2032. apparently the one drdo developed had some integration problems.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/04/tejas-lsp-3-makes-successful-first.html

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal...letes-successful-maiden-flight_100353139.html

LRDE is pursuing AESA and there was a tender for vendor participation. here -

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/02/exclusive-aesa-programme-for-tejas.html

2. EW suite.responsibility rests with DARE(defense avionics research establishment). not much news about the progress of the so called Mayavi. again israelis have been pulled in. what is this talk of integrating this suite with JSF f-35?
EW suites are classified. you will never get open info on these. particularly on "MAYAWI" because it is israel - india joint effort. apparently the israelis wanted to integrate this EW suite on the JSF, a info which IMO is unsubstantiated.

however from various reports one comes to know DRDO developed RWJ is functional on Mig 27. reasonable to expect it may go on LCA too.

earlier we had DRDO "TEMPEST" as the EW suite even on SU 30MKIs!!

have a bigger heart. DRDO has done some wonderful work in this field.

AGAIN WE ARE CITING tEJAS MARK 2 AS IF WITH mARK 2's APPEARNCE EVERYTHING WILL BECOME AVAILABLE INSTANTLY.
i did not get that. i don't think anybody is thinking like that.

3. well I am sorry about this Kaveri bashing. of course the GTRE has opened its big mouth and bitten off too big a chunk to swallow but come on. the GTRE chief as recently as March 2010 that the Kaveri will be flight tested in the latter half of June 2010.
modern turbofan engines are very complicated to build and for those with no past experience or infrastructure, it is doubly difficult. while progress is being made, one needs to be pragmatic of the outcome. the fact that they could build a turbofan (though a bit underpowered at this stage) is by no means a less achievement. patience is the word. besides it had collateral benefit too in the form of being adopted for naval ships!!!

The latest news coming from various credible sources indicates a lot of differing opinion about the influence of snecma which of course would only be too willing to make the most of this situation. Snecam's involvement doesn't appear to promise a engine with the desired minimum thrust of 95-100 KN thrust and this is the reality however bitter it is to swallow.the current equation thus is as follows

Kaveri-snecma= engine for indian navy
kaveri+snecma= hybrid engine =GE4040 IN20 in performance.

so where is the need for snecma??? have they given us Single crystal technology?? No. are we close to mastering it-NO!! there were stray reports that DRDO has got the technology. that is absolutely not the truth. will they deliver an engine with required thrust-only on paper. frankly the presence of snecma is only delaying the inevitable.
all valid questions. :happy_8:

but as of now the snechma - drdo/GTRE joint effort is only on paper!! better to wait for some info. besides there is search between EJ200 & F-414 for the mark 2 version of the LCA.

yes there are positives from the project and we may get a decent plane BUT on critical technological issues we have not only failed to develop but sadly we have also failed to address prudently. What would have been the fate of Tejas without Israel? Has Wait for mark 2 become a convenient excuse for the DRDO angencies?? don't tell me XY AND Z took 50 years to develop that and 80 years to develop this. It seems likely mark 2 is a convenient excuse for many.
it is a lot more complex than that which infact would require a separate thread!!!!

i did not get your point on the ISRAEL bit?? the avionics we sourced from them is available elsewhere too. it is just that IAF, IMO, standardisisng most of their equipment around minimal manufacturers for better commonality and care. also the fact that Israeli systems are second to none and IAF being well versed with them adds its own value to the entire scene.

however i do appreciate Israeli help in the indian MMR but again this was due to LRDE wanting to make it indigenous. otherwise we could have very well put EL 2032 on the LCA.
 

vijay jagannathan

New Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
178
Likes
10
thanks PPgj and thanks Rahul---- for the positivity. you guys make it worthwhile. Lets all hope that we are on the right track.
 

LETHALFORCE

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,968
Likes
48,929
Country flag
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...s/awx/2010/07/09/awx_07_09_2010_p0-239999.xml

India Thought Leaders: LCA (Navy) Will Add Punch To Blue Water Vision, Adm. Nirmal Verma Says

India rolled out the naval version (NP-1) of its Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) on July 6 in Bangalore with Defense Minister A.K. Antony leading the team. With the air force version of LCA (Tejas) now months away from its much-awaited initial operational clearance (IOC), the NP-1 rollout was hailed as a significant new chapter in Indian aviation.

Amidst all the feel-good news stories on NP-1 in India's media, it was important to check the pulse of the user, who would eventually have the final say on the platform's worthiness. AVIATION WEEK Senior Aerospace and Defense Correspondent (India) Anantha Krishnan M. caught up with Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) Adm. Nirmal Verma to learn the significance of the NP-1 rollout and the way ahead.

AW: The LCA Navy was rolled out on July 6 after the project got the Cabinet Committee on Security's nod in April 2003. How significant is this program for the Indian Navy?

CNS: The LCA (Navy) was sanctioned in March '03 [following] the success of LCA (AF) in January 2001. They were planned as a possible replacement to our aging fleet of Sea Harriers, which have been in service since the '80s. The vision of the Navy has always been to be an effective force, and hence LCA (Navy) shall play an important role in our future carrier operations doctrine. The LCA (Navy) design specifically caters [to] the first Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC1) scheduled to be delivered by Cochin Shipyard Ltd by 2014. The aircraft is expected to have state-of-art sensors and weapons and would be an integral part of our air arm. LCA (Navy) would add punch to the Navy's blue water vision.

AW: What role has the Naval Project Team (NPT) based at the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) played in speeding up the program?

CNS: The Naval Project Team is part of the LCA (Navy) Program office at ADA and is a composite team of scientists from ADA and field experts from the Navy. This team provides [the] Navy specific requirements during design and development in terms of domain knowledge and expertise. They have been involved in the development of the aircraft since its conceptualization and form an important part of the entire design and development team of ADA. The team is also monitoring the Shore Based Test Facility (SBTF) project coming up at Goa, and is working toward the interface of LCA Navy with our Indigenous Aircraft Carrier.

AW: ADA says that the first flight of NP1 will happen by the end of this year, and NP 2 one year after that. Are you confident that these deadlines will be met?

CNS: Unlike the LCA (AF), the LCA (Navy) experiences additional force during takeoff/landing, and requires increased cockpit vision and low speed maneuverability during carrier operations. These challenges are being addressed by ADA. We look forward to the day when the NP1 and NP2 take to the skies.

AW: A Shore Based Test Facility (SBTF) is coming up at Naval Air Station Hansa, Goa, and is said to be only the third such facility in the world. In addition to LCA, will you use this facility for any other platforms?

CNS: The Shore Based Test Facility at Goa will primarily be used to carry out extensive Carrier Compatibility Tests for present and future versions of LCA (Navy). Since the facility replicates the deck of an aircraft carrier, it is an excellent platform for maintaining currency for the aircrew and [a] training ground of [the] crew for carrier operations. This would reduce the training load on the carrier, thereby increasing her operational availability. The Shore Based Test Facility can be used for training requirements for the carrier borne fighter aircraft in our inventory, viz MIG 29K.
AW: Tejas (IAF) had to go through various difficulties and the project invited a lot of negative publicity from the media and even at times from the user. In your view, what are the key things the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) must do for an early induction into the Navy?

CNS: The design and development of a new state-of-art aircraft is a tedious and time-consuming process. ADA and HAL, having gained certain expertise during the development of the Air Force version of LCA, are better placed to carry out the design changes for the naval version. Putting the LCA (N) into "flight" trials and proving of carrier compatibility of the naval prototypes and meeting the specified naval mission requirements must now be one of the key thrust areas for the naval program.

AW: How important is it for the Indian armed forces to support indigenous programs?

CNS: The importance of self-reliance in well recognized by the armed forces and is being supported wholeheartedly. In order to [have] indigenization and self-reliance in defense production, a number of steps have been taken by the government in [the] recent past. As you are aware, the Kelkar Committee appointed by the government on the subject submitted its recommendation in 2005 for the purpose, and a number of these have been approved for implementation. Measures have also been recommended by the Standing Committee on Defense in its report of April 2009.

Issues and concepts of indigenization, defense industry, R&D, [and] joint ventures, as well as policy frameworks are all interrelated. The Indian Navy has consistently supported all efforts in these linked areas, and this is borne out of the fact that we have made good progress in indigenous warship construction, though some areas related to capacity and timelines need to be addressed. We have also proactively pursued indigenization with respect to the induction of Arihant, as also in key areas of equipment and subsystems for warship and submarine construction. A number of DRDO projects have been proactively supported by us, and we will continue to assist all agencies, public and private, engaged in the process of indigenization. At the same time, we have to plan for alternatives when indigenous programs do not materialize as per projects time frames in order to ensure that requisite capabilities are inducted in time for operational requirements.

AW: Many of our homegrown projects were always delayed. What are the main causes for these delays and what is your mantra to overcome this?

CNS: There are a number of reasons for time and cost overruns in indigenous projects. These include technological and developmental challenges, current limitations of our defence industrial base, nonavailability in time of requisite materials and components, and procedural delays in some cases. Efforts have been made at various levels to address these key areas of concern. The Ramarao Committee recently submitted its recommendations on some of these areas, and the same are under examination by the Ministry of Defense.

In December 2008, the Standing Committee on Defense submitted a report on 'Indigenization of Defense Production – Public Private Partnership.' The report highlighted the need for public-private partnership in defense production. Steps have been taken in the recent past to ensure greater participation by public and private industry. We need to enhance the vendor base and infuse competitiveness through private sector participation. Defense production, as a sum total of DPSU and private sector capabilities, would be increasingly relevant as an index of our indigenous efforts. To achieve desired levels of self-reliance, our R&D and industrial responses to the existing and emerging requirements of the services would need to be strengthened. The indigenization process must also ensure that requisite capabilities are inducted in time. The time taken from the "drawing board" to the "delivery" stage should be comparable to global standards, and processes related to specifications, design and production need to be made efficient and result-oriented.



(This interview primarily focused on the LCA (Navy) program and related developmental issues only. Aviation Week at a later stage will bring to you more reports on the Indian Navy by capturing the voices of senior officials.)
 

nandu

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,913
Likes
163
Light Combat Aircraft for Navy to fly this year

Bangalore, July 6

Navy's first Light Combat Aircraft — the first step towards fulfilling the Indian Navy's ambition of having an indigenously built modern air power on its ships — was unveiled here on Tuesday.

The first prototype, a trainer called NP1, will fly in October followed by the fighter version, NP2, the Defence Minister, Mr A.K. Antony, announced as the fully assembled aircraft was rolled out of the hangar.

The naval aircraft will be part of the fleet that will go on the indigenous aircraft-carrying ship, codenamed IAC-1, that is being built in Kochi.

The LCA Navy and the aircraft-carrier are expected to be ready by 2014, Mr Antony said. Two more prototypes were sanctioned in December 2009.

The LCA Navy is a vastly modified version of the indigenous LCA, the Tejas. It was sanctioned in 2003. The LCA Navy is meant to replace the aged BAE-built Sea Harriers.

Tejas platform

The medium naval aircraft, the MiG-29K, was inducted recently.

Powered by a GE-F-404-IN20 engine, the LCA Navy is described as "the first indigenous effort to build a complete air element" for the Navy.

The Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral Nirmal Verma, said ship-borne air fleet is a very important military component of the future.

A Ship-based Testing Facility (SBTF) — a simulation of an aircraft carrier — is being built in Goa to test and train the naval aviation component. This and the IAC-1 would give the Indian Navy a quantum jump and help it become a "reckonable blue-water multi-dimensional force," he said.

The SBTF and the naval prototypes are estimated to cost Rs 1,700 crore.

This is the 50th year of the induction of a naval air squadron on INS Vikrant, which has been decommissioned, and the INS Viraat.

The IAC-1 and the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov), which are being acquired from Russia, are meant to complement this power.

Mr Antony said these ships should be in possession by 2011. A pan-India network of radars, including 46 along the coast, would ensure security when in place.

Admiral Verma said at a news conference that a satellite for the Navy was being developed by the ISRO. It is expected to be ready next year. Commodore C. D. Balaji, Project Director for NP-1, said the LCA Navy was the world's only carrier-based light fighter aircraft. NP-1 is a vastly modified piece of the LCA. It has been customised by LCA's designer, the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), and built by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd in six months.

The ADA Director, Dr P.S. Subrahmanyam, said the re-jig for the Navy was challenging. The aircraft still needs to shed 400 kg and the landing gear has to be perfected.

The ship-borne aircraft has to take off within 200 metres against Air Force version's 800 metres; and land within 90 metres, a tenth of land-based landing length.

The high strength steel had to be sourced specially from Midhani (Defence PSU Mishra Dhatu Nigam).

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2010/07/07/stories/2010070753190400.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Articles

Top