ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Sancho]

Yes, estimates and so are Shook Law's figures. I was only wondering what inflation indices were used such that estimates went up from 190 crores tp 400 crores in less than 2 years.. Even Parrikar in his statement around mid-2016 stated that an LCA would cost 200-250 crores!!

Well that needs to be seen, we just have the early infos so far and even the 400 crore is just an unofficial estimated

60,000 Crores for development and production != 400 crores for each fighter in a fly-away condition. We still do not know for sure what packages are included, does it included on site support, fleet maintainability and life cycle costs or not.

The flyaway cost is only for the production of the fighter and you have to keep in mind that this is an indigenous development, not a foreign procurement. HAL is only responsible for the production and doesn't provide contracts for training or logistics for the air bases, like Dassault does in the Rafale case. Spare and maintenance could be contracted in a separate deal as part of the system costs.
But then again, much will depend on the costs and contracts for the foreign radar, EW and do we have a contract with GE yet, for 83 engines?

 

[Kshithij]

It has the option to carry an external twin barrel gun pod similar to Mirage 2000, but that simply is outdated, which is why it never was integrated, nor requested by any customer.



That's the point! When you can launch your weapons outside of the reach of manpads or AA, you don't need armor, or fly low any more.

CAS also involves fighting soldiers entrenched or in bunkers etc. Why will you use ammunitions like LGB which costs millions to bust a small entrenched bunker of few thousand rupees? Also, how many bombs can Rafale, LCA carry? How many sorties are you going to make to clear a small strip of 2 sq km if it has large number of bunkers?

Specialised CAS planes fly low, carry large number of ammunitions and hence are cheap as well as efficient. Your idea of using LCA for CAS role is like the idea of using RPG instead of assault rifles. RPG is better but is slower, expensive and heavier than rifles.

 

[Kshithij]

The flyaway cost is only for the production of the fighter and you have to keep in mind that this is an indigenous development, not a foreign procurement. HAL is only responsible for the production and doesn't provide contracts for training or logistics for the air bases, like Dassault does in the Rafale case. Spare and maintenance could be contracted in a separate deal as part of the system costs.
But then again, much will depend on the costs and contracts for the foreign radar, EW and do we have a contract with GE yet, for 83 engines?

We have already ordered F404 engines over a hundred in number. The contract for capital creation, maintenance is always included in HAL contract too, not just imports. Training is irrelevant. I am sure the cost of training isn't much.Logistics is also supplied by HAL. Logistics don't come by themselves.

 

[Sancho]

Specialised CAS planes fly low, carry large number of ammunitions

Not really, even an A10 today uses LGBs, PGMs and guided A2G missiles, which won't be launched from low altitudes.
The load capability for guided weapons depends on hardpoint restrictions or the use of multi launchers. An A10 can carry 2 triple launchers with AGM 65 A2G missiles, an LCA could carry 2 or 4 twin or even triple launchers with Helina as well. An EF can carry 2 to 6 triple launchers for Brimstone missiles.

 

[Kshithij]

Not really, even an A10 today uses LGBs, PGMs and guided A2G missiles, which won't be launched from low altitudes.
The load capability for guided weapons depends on hardpoint restrictions or the use of multi launchers. An A10 can carry 2 triple launchers with AGM 65 A2G missiles, an LCA could carry 2 or 4 twin or even triple launchers with Helina as well. An EF can carry 2 to 6 triple launchers for Brimstone missiles.

Yes, but the cost of A10 is much cheaper as it uses poor quality engine, radars, has higher mileage and easier maintenance.

Warthog A10:

Rafale:

The hardpoints are simlar in number. But, A10 is ultra cheap to build, repair and operate.

So, it is more prudent to make A10 than rafale or LCA. Making A10 is like making HJT-36, but bigger with twin engine.

Your argument taht Tejas or Rafale can be used for CAS is correct. But, that becomes unnecessarily expensive

 

[G10]

No aero engines are poor quality. They are either rated for thrust or efficiency. Are cheap or expensive yes but not compromised on quality.

 

[Kshithij]

No aero engines are poor quality. They are either rated for thrust or efficiency. Are cheap or expensive yes but not compromised on quality.

I meat low thrust to weight and lacking after burners. A10 engine are 40kN at 650kg weight. So, I called them as low quality.

F404 weighs 1ton for 86kN. This costs 4 million dollars a piece. That is what I meant

 

[Shashwat]

Yes, but the cost of A10 is much cheaper as it uses poor quality engine, radars, has higher mileage and easier maintenance.

Rafale:

Thats a Eurofighter.

10 chars.

 

[Prashant12]

The #LCATejas PV-6(KH-T2010) at #AeroIndia 2017
Photograph by: Karthik Barad

https://www.facebook.com/tejas.lca

 

[Adioz]

I believe the original question that started this entire "LCA unfit for CAS" shebang was @pmaitra suggesting LCA might not be able to handle a dive deliver unguided bombs at a low altitude due to its delta wing design. Now let us consider LCA flying under the radar for a SEAD/DEAD op in Arunachal (like that recent Su-30MKI we lost). How will it handle? And if it crashes, no matter who the media blames, would the Air Force not clarify that it was aware of he risks involved and still went ahead?

@Sancho what makes you think that the era of dive bombs is over? No tactic, no matter how old, is ever eliminated from the military mind. Yes modern era PGMs and PGM kits for dumb bombs mean that there will be no need to dive. But consider, what would happen if you were asked to mount a bombing mission in adverse weather conditions? You would have to fly low and tactics you thought were outdated would become the only possible option.

@Kshithij the argument is not about A-10 vs LCA in CAS. A-10 is a dedicated CAS platform that we do not have or intend to have. Even if we did have it, if a GLO asks for an airstrike and all you have available in the area is a couple of LCAs, you will have to use them. Cannot wait for the A-10s to arrive.

 

[Kshithij]

Thats a Eurofighter.

10 chars.

Sorry, since Sancho spoke of EF, I gave picture of it. But, I forgot to write it as EF

I believe the original question that started this entire "LCA unfit for CAS" shebang was @pmaitra suggesting LCA might not be able to handle a dive deliver unguided bombs at a low altitude due to its delta wing design. Now let us consider LCA flying under the radar for a SEAD/DEAD op in Arunachal (like that recent Su-30MKI we lost). How will it handle? And if it crashes, no matter who the media blames, would the Air Force not clarify that it was aware of he risks involved and still went ahead?

@Sancho what makes you think that the era of dive bombs is over? No tactic, no matter how old, is ever eliminated from the military mind. Yes modern era PGMs and PGM kits for dumb bombs mean that there will be no need to dive. But consider, what would happen if you were asked to mount a bombing mission in adverse weather conditions? You would have to fly low and tactics you thought were outdated would become the only possible option.

@Kshithij the argument is not about A-10 vs LCA in CAS. A-10 is a dedicated CAS platform that we do not have or intend to have. Even if we did have it, if a GLO asks for an airstrike and all you have available in the area is a couple of LCAs, you will have to use them. Cannot wait for the A-10s to arrive.

True, LCA can be used as CAS. But, the question is whether Hawk-i or HTT-40 better for the job? The answer is yes. So, use Hawk-i with HTFE engine

 

[Adioz]

Sorry, since Sancho spoke of EF, I gave picture of it. But, I forgot to write it as EF



True, LCA can be used as CAS. But, the question is whether Hawk-i or HTT-40 better for the job? The answer is yes. So, use Hawk-i with HTFE engine

HTT-40 is the kind of stuff Army would be interested in. But first they need to get the other avaiation assets like IMRH, Apache and LCH inducted. After that, they should think of HTT-40 in a dedicated CAS role (after they have convinced the air force of their need to have a fixed-wing aircraft ). Even then, such platforms will only fit niche roles.

 

[Kyubi]

Sorry, since Sancho spoke of EF, I gave picture of it. But, I forgot to write it as EF



True, LCA can be used as CAS. But, the question is whether Hawk-i or HTT-40 better for the job? The answer is yes. So, use Hawk-i with HTFE engine

dont think BAE systems will allow for swapping Ardour engine with HTFE.

 

[Kshithij]

dont think BAE systems will allow for swapping Ardour engine with HTFE.

India has made Hawk-i in India. India also can make its own HAWK except for engine and that too due to lack of technology.

Hawk design has been obtained by India and India can make it at will.

HTT-40 is the kind of stuff Army would be interested in. But first they need to get the other avaiation assets like IMRH, Apache and LCH inducted. After that, they should think of HTT-40 in a dedicated CAS role (after they have convinced the air force of their need to have a fixed-wing aircraft ). Even then, such platforms will only fit niche roles.

HTT40 has already been ordered in 100. Production will begin in 2018. HTT is nothing but Indian Pilatus PC7. PC7 has been used for CAS many times before too. It is very cheap to produce it too

 

[darshan978]

Yes, but the cost of A10 is much cheaper as it uses poor quality engine, radars, has higher mileage and easier maintenance.

Warthog A10:

Rafale:

The hardpoints are simlar in number. But, A10 is ultra cheap to build, repair and operate.

So, it is more prudent to make A10 than rafale or LCA. Making A10 is like making HJT-36, but bigger with twin engine.

Your argument taht Tejas or Rafale can be used for CAS is correct. But, that becomes unnecessarily expensive

Typhoon not rafale.............

 

[binayak95]

We are going in circles needlessly.

Lets put it this way:

1. Can Tejas do strike missions? yes it can.
2. Can it do what an A-10/Apache/Mi-35/Su-25 Frogfoot do? No, it can't. Doesn't have armour and doesn't carry nearly enough payload or fuel to loiter and dish our punishment again and again.
3. Then again, can those birds do what the Tejas can? A2A roles? No, they can't.

So, do you have the budget to have a separate CAS plane? Not really. And quite low in the priority list of the IAF/IA since Apaches and LCHs are already in the pipeline.

Besides, you want awesome Air Support in an Airspace you own, get a AC-130 or equivalent, mate.

 

[tejas warrior]

India launches $8 billion program for light combat aircraft

The purchase of an adapted version of the LCA Mark-1 comes amid skepticism about a another effort to purchase of 105 Mark 2 versions of futuristic, homemade light-combat aircraft for $15 billion. Service officials and analysts have said that program lacks clarity.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/12 ... Js.twitter

 

[Sancho]

Yes, but the cost of A10 is much cheaper...

...Your argument taht Tejas or Rafale can be used for CAS is correct. But, that becomes unnecessarily expensive

No it doesn't:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/sukhoi-su-30mki.43829/page-75#post-1381884
As you can see, an A10 has operational costs just slightly below a medium class F16, while being limited to a single role only. And if used in contested areas, it requires additional fighter escorts, by the lack of self defense capability. So 5900+8200 dollar per hour, for a mission that could be done by a single F16 as well.

When you then compare it to light class fighters, or armed trainers, it gets even worse, because they are cheaper to operate.

So when you have air superiority, an LCA with the right combo of weapons, would be more capable and cost-effective for us.
While we need more capable MMRCAs and MKIs for attacks in high threat areas, where survivability has the highest priority.

 

[Sancho]

what makes you think that the era of dive bombs is over? No tactic, no matter how old, is ever eliminated from the military mind.

IAFs Kargil experience and nearly all kind of NATO wars after that.

Kargil showed us how inefficient dumb bomb attacks are, especially in difficult terrain, because dumb bombs can't be used as precise as guided bombs can. You therefore need far more bombs and sorites, do take out a target, when a single guided bomb can be used.

Modern warfare is also linked, where ground forces or UAVs can provided laser guidance for an LGB. That makes especially CAS more efficient and less risky for ground forces, than dropping dumb bombs or making gun attacks on an area, where the pilot thinks the enemies are (I read somewhere that the A10 has the highest friendly fire kills, must look that up once more).

And if you look at NATO wars, the need for guided bombs is even more obvious, because low collateral damage is a key requirement today. French Air Force uses AASM guidance kits, but replace the warhead with concrete, to have a high precision, low collateral damage weapon, because they don't want to use a 500lb warhead for a light target like a jeep, or the targets are in urban areas, with a lot of civilians around.

For LCA being able to drop dumb bombs and train pilots for dive attacks is a back up, but the priority lies in guided strike capability, as a lesson learned from past experience. The only sad thing is, that we don't have indigenous LGBs or ATGMs yet.

Btw LCA can fly low as well, but the point is, it doesn't need to in modern warfare, because it's the weapon that travels to the targets, since that increases the survivability. An A10 (or LCA) that launches an LGB from 14Km distance at high altitude, is more survivable against manpads and AA guns, than an A10 that has to fly close to the target to attack it with dumb bombs.

 

[Sancho]

Saurav Jha speculating

Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an: