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.

Pulkit

Satyameva Jayate "Truth Alone Triumphs"
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
1,622
Likes
590
Country flag
@ersakhtivel, How many Tejas fighters HAL has built already? You keep on repeating 40 order. You forget that all aircrafts (and not only SP series) are paid by MOD. When HAL builds a TD or LSP, that is not built for free. Even the number of mark-1 order is 46 including navy. Plus the prototypes that still have to be built for both mark-1 and mark-2, the orders stand in excess of 55. As for pricing, this is an issue between mod and hal. Let mod bring out competitive bidding for production line of Tejas. That should have been the correct way. Why award this project or any project to HAL by default?
There are no lies in what he has been stating . All the point said have been backed with a reason or a source.

Cost is the issue yes it is as the numbers are too low.

Numbers is neither in the hands of MOD or HAL but its IAF who decides upon that.

If they want more then only MOD and HAl comes in picture.

HAL has been with ADA since the very beginning taking it away at this point is not feasible as it wud have taken away a few more years..

MOD is already looking for private for mk2 so lets see how it goes.

I repeat that the biggest misfortune of tejas is HAL. HAL is only interested in screw driver work. If a private company was involved from the start, this project would have succeeded with few squadrons flying already.
HAL is not the only misfortune.
IAF has played it role brilliantly in defaming neglecting avoiding Tejas.

MOD also has not been a delight they are also equally responsible.

even in this case HAL had to do mainly srew driver job.

We had no private sector at the time Tejas was born and there were alot of security related aspects at that time.
times have changed lets see how well it goes for tejas MK2
Tejas is child of ADA not HAL.



@ersakhtivel sorry replied on a query asked to u
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
It's like shooting from another person's shoulders.

So, IAF wants to hand over LCA to a private player?

How about IAF actually get a private player to design, make a a prototype, and finally put into production a fighter of their very own? It is cool to have something served on a platter, isn't it?

And private players will build a plane like LCA? More likely they will sub contract it to smaller companies, if at all they take up this challenge. Private companies are interested in quick profits.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
As long as MK1 not over people cannot get on MK2 ..

This thread is only for MK1 development and news ..

Try to keep your imagination of war senerio to some other threads ..


Nope, now it's high time to produce MKII because Pakistan is getting 110 Jf-17s from china. And Pakistan can assemble 20-30 units per year. So we need to be fast.
Keeping both Pak and China as rivals we are very slow in aircraft procurement. MK1 can be a good trainer but we need more numbers of combat ready aircrafts before Pakis get those all 110. And their procurement time is faster than ours. 50 in three years and due to this Modi demanded 37 Rafales in fly away condition from France. We cannot deploy Su-mki for every combat sector.
 

Screambowl

Ghanta Senior Member?
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
7,950
Likes
7,908
Country flag
As long as MK1 not over people cannot get on MK2 ..

This thread is only for MK1 development and news ..

Try to keep your imagination of war senerio to some other threads ..
Just by comparing the avionics, fuselage, etc etc tech details, you cannot conclude which aircraft is better which is not, unless until it shows its iron on battle field.
 
Last edited:

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042

salute

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
2,173
Likes
1,094
You can clearly see that the basic design philosophy is very old, I hope that the plane will be cheap enough to operate to justify the development. The basic design is from 1990? With Dassault consulting. No wonder it looks like Mirage.

I hope you manage better with your own developed fighter than finland did. Our Myrsky ( Storm ) fighter fell apart in the air because of bad quality glue. You know the problems with high tech composite materials...
VL Myrsky - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That thing you have circled has already been redone with a smooth bump in LSP-8



I dont think tejas look that bad in the couple of photos below.




Thank god ADA didn't use the storm fighter glue!!!tejas has flown 2500 sorties and achieved 26 deg AOA and 7Gs without breaking up. SO they are using good glues I suppose.
1990 design philosophy very old!!!!!!!!!
Then what about F-22, F-35, PAKFA, and all the Euro canards? Certainly their air frame was not designed in 2000-2010 time frame as far as I know.
Well, it is not that bad in these angles. Maybe there is a gap for this kind of fighter in the market. In any case: hats of for developing it, great achievement. In some angles ( rear side quarter ) it even looks a little like Mig-21, which it is supposed to replace.
first you said it looks like mirage - 2000 and now it looks mig - 21 to you. :laugh:
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,762
Country flag
.

From Dr.Vivek Ahuja BRF


LCA vs Mirage 2000

The Beta Coefficient: LCA Tejas versus F-16 in combat (Part-I)

have you read it?

And his new "study results" in BR?

As always, feedback is welcome. :)

Notes:

1. I have been running busy last week and haven't had a chance to address the comments and queries on this thread as much as I would have liked to. Pliss to give this mujahid a little time.
2. I did an analysis of the flow-field around my Mirage-2000 solutions in FlightStream and found that the drag is getting underpredicted at higher angles of attack. I am investigating this anomaly.
3. The Dassault Mirage-2000C flight data numbers are bullshit. They have almost certainly messed (knowingly?) the range and radius definitions.

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...jas-fighter-s-role-in-war-113122800734_1.html
Seems to be in line with test pilot views on tejas mk1, which he says is at least equal to upgraded mirage-2000.

what will be the case with rafale?
4. The LCA is far closer to the Mirage-2000 than earlier estimates. I will post that article with the analysis when I have a suitable explanation on why my delta wing solutions are under-predicting the drag.
5. The F-16A/B data used for the above article has been validated through different wind tunnel results. So its accurate. And its compared with the LCA data provided by ADA.
6. This article I have posted above compares the LCA with the PAF early "block" F-16s in the horizontal plane only. Part-II will expand on the vertical plane analysis and more instantaneous turn rata evaluations.

Pliss to read the article and enjoy onlee. 8)

-Vivek

But his F-16 A turn rates seem lesser, at first look.
 
Last edited:

mahesh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2010
Messages
607
Likes
476
Country flag
Over three decades in making but India's indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas is yet to be fully operational and battle ready. The LCA project was sanctioned in August 1983 with a cost of Rs 560 crore in order to replace the MiG-21 fighters in the Indian Air Force arsenal. But even after overshooting the budget by a huge margin and missing several deadlines, the LCA Tejas Mark-I fighter is deficient on 53 parameters reducing the fighter's operational employability and is yet to be inducted in IAF squadrons.

Even though the LCA was given Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) in December 2013 but it has failed to meet the IAF's standards due to a large number of issues plaguing the fighter. As per the initial plan which had a development schedule of eight to 10 years, the first set of LCA should have been ready by 1994.

But according a Comptroller and Auditor General report tabled in Parliament on Friday, the project is way couple of decades behind schedule, mainly on account of design changes necessitated due to change in weapon requirements, non-availability of Kaveri engine, delay in completion of work packages by the work centres, etc. There is still no indigenous engine for the fighter jet as Gas Turbine Research Establishment, Bangalore failed to develop the Kaveri engine as per the LCA schedule and specifications, necessitating Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) to import GE-F404-IN20 aero engine from GE, USA to continue the development activities.



LCA Mark-I is also deficient in Electronic Warfare capabilities which are mandatory in any modern fighter.

#lca tejas #cag #indian air force #lca project
More than 30 years have passed since the LCA Programme was given the green signal but the fighter only achieved Initial Operational Clearance in December 2013 after a delay of eight years and the Full Operational Clearance, which was scheduled to be completed by December 2008, is now expected to be to be achieved only by December 2015.

CAG report says the slippages have occurred due to the bottlenecks in execution of LCA project, extent of meeting Air Staff Requirement including weaponisation, ADA's decision to advance building of two prototypes from Full Scale Engineering Development (FSED) Phase-II to FSED Phase-I on the ground of accelerating the development process of LCA, failed to yield the desired results as the FSED Phase I was closed in March 2004 involving a delay of six years and without completing all the activities, which were carried forward to FSED Phase-II.

This decision of ADA rendered the prototypes deficient of critical onboard systems (Multi-Mode Radar, Self-Protection Jammer, Radar Warning Receiver) and led to ADA using the Limited Series Production aircraft (meant for IAF use) towards flight testing/evaluation of these critical on board systems, in contravention to the commitment given to the Government of India while obtaining sanction in November 2001 for building of these aircraft.

LCA Mark-I, which achieved Initial Operational Clearance in December 2013, has significant shortfalls (53 permanent waivers/concessions) in meeting the ASR as a result of which, it will have reduced operational capabilities and reduced survivability, thereby limiting its operational employability when inducted into IAF squadrons. Shortcomings in LCA Mark-I (increased weight, reduced internal fuel capacity, non-compliance of fuel system protection, pilot protection from front, reduced speed) were expected to be overcome by development of LCA Mark-II, an aircraft with lower weight and a higher thrust engine which is expected to meet the ASR, had been taken up by ADA in November 2009 and is scheduled for completion by December 2018.

In one of the most glaring omissions, IAF would be inducting LCA fighters without the availability of trainer LCA which will adversely impact pilot training. Production of trainer aircraft at HAL was delayed as the trainer LCA had not achieved IOC/FOC. As regards flight training simulator, IAF was using an upgraded Full Mission Simulator (FMS) at ADE for pilot training, pending supply of a FMS by HAL at LCA operating base.

Following the addition of new weapons by Air HQ for operational edge of LCA in March 1997 and then again in December 2009 necessitated design changes on the aircraft, coupled with delayed specifying (December 2009) of integrating R-73E missile with Multi-Mode Radar/Helmet Mounted Display and Sight and delayed identification (December 2009) of Beyond Visual Range Missiles also contributed to the delays in achieving IOC/FOC by LCA.

LCA Mark-I is also deficient in Electronic Warfare capabilities which are mandatory in any modern fighter. LCA has no Self Protection Jammer due to space constraints and the Radar Warning Receiver/Counter Measure Dispensing System fitted on the aircraft are having performance issues.

Even the level of indigenisation planned has not been achieved by the LCA programme. In June 1993 the government had emphasised on increasing the indigenous content of LCA while sanctioning FSED in phased manner, but even in January 2015 the indigenous content of LCA which was estimated by ADA as 70 per cent actually worked out to about 35 per cent.

Several critical components including the Kaveri engine, Multi-Mode Radar, Radome, Multi-Functional Display System and Flight Control System Actuators taken up for indigenous development could not be developed successfully, resulting in their import. Even development of Jet Fuel Starter, though achieved indigenously, had performance issues which are yet to be resolved.

The prototype version (PV) and Limited Series Production (LSP) of LCA3 built by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) had low serviceability due to delay in snags analysis, slow recovery of aircraft from rectification, shortage of critical LRUs at flight hangar, aircraft being used as test rigs, large number of unproductive sorties etc. which impacted availability of aircraft for flight testing and contributed to delays in development of LCA.

The manufacturing facilities created at HAL presently cater for production of only four aircraft per annum against the envisaged requirement of eight aircraft per annum due to delays in procuring plant and machinery, tools and jigs and also construction of production hangars, which would further impact production of LCA and induction into IAF squadrons.

Such a huge delay in the programme has force the IAF to upgrade its existing fleet at a considerable cost to ensure that its already depleting squadrons are not left with obsolete jets. The upgradation of existing aircraft has cost the IAF Rs 20,037 crore and involved the MiG-21 BIS, Mirage 2000, Mig-29 and Jaguar fleet.

After the LCA programme was sanctioned, the IAF in October 1985 issued Air Staff Requirement (ASR) with a projected requirement of 200 LCA fighters and 20 trainers to be inducted by 1994 but neither of the two has been fully operationalised compromising the country's air defence.

The LCA was envisaged as a light weight multi-mission fighter aircraft, having contemporary air combat and offensive air support capabilities with excellent maneuverability for close air combat at low and medium altitudes in order to ensure extended air defence cover over the forward bases and tactical battle areas.

But the delay has ensured that IAF pilots continue to fly the MiG-21 which were first inducted in 1966 with the last of the fighters joining the fleet in 1987. A majority of MiG-21 aircraft were expected to be phased out in the 1990s with the LCA replacing them.
 

Lions Of Punjab

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
652
Likes
926
Country flag
50% of Rafale deal value will be invested in India: Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar




Parrikar also said that with India buying around 36 Rafale jets for now, government savings on this project is likely to be up Rs 60,000-65,000 crore. This money, Parrikar said, will be used to accelerate defence manufacturing in India, including speeding up the long-ingestation Light Combat Aircraft. The minister said LCA will be inducted in large numbers, up to 200 fighters or 10 squadrons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
^^ Nothing new, Tejas meant to be replace at least 14 squadrons, This was conformed during former government rule ..

Gud to see things are moving forward smoothly ..
 

Khagesh

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,274
Likes
870
Will that 50% be invested in LCA lines?

Anyhow, from that report by CAG only one thing stood out for me - the internal jammer. Rest all was a Memoirs of a Baboo who was into the thick of defence acquisitions and administration during the 10 years of UPA and today finds himself in the CAG.

What is not said is that out of the 53 waivers there were 20 waivers that could not have been fulfilled by Mk-1 but were nonetheless raised by IAF. So much for its ASQR.

LCA Mk-1 is fit for a lot of duties and instead of wasting time employing a 29-UPG or a 2K-UPG where a simpler LCA Mk-1 can do the duty, IAF should be focusing on how to maximax utilize the upgrades of the 29 and 2K in areas where LCA Mk-1 cannot have any use. Otherwise IAF would be left with bollywoodgiri like hauling water and 3 tons of relief materials on a 20 ton capacity plane.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
CAG present report is outdated, As new EW suit is recently tested on a LSP batch ..

The upgraded MIG-29 airframe are for temporary purpose so does Mir-2000, They will be too retired in due time ..
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
@Khagesh, the realistic situation is that LCA FOC needs to be completed, and HAL capacity needs to be augmented. The LCA will roll out but the number is too small to make any decent impact on IAF. This unfortunately creates a situation which requires imports.

Let us see how Mr Parikkar manages the inventory question. If 'make in India' has to be implemented seriously, then we should see a fighter license given to a private company very soon.
 

indiandefencefan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
437
Likes
345
Country flag
@Khagesh, the realistic situation is that LCA FOC needs to be completed, and HAL capacity needs to be augmented. The LCA will roll out but the number is too small to make any decent impact on IAF. This unfortunately creates a situation which requires imports.

Let us see how Mr Parikkar manages the inventory question. If 'make in India' has to be implemented seriously, then we should see a fighter license given to a private company very soon.
The indian defence establishment is too paranoid to give out a license to any private company .................
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
There is no way HAL will meet Tejas numbers. The problem with HAL is clear - it was forced into screw driver tech too long. Its manpower is accustomed to easy life. Productivity at HAL is EXTREMELY LOW. Unless Mr Parikkar knows magic or has some supernatural powers, there is no way enough Tejas are rolling out of HAL.
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
Paranoia with private companies will have to go like so many other things that Indians have given up. India was always a capitalist society and will always be. The few decades of socialism will be remembered like a bad dream.
 

sob

Mod
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
6,425
Likes
3,805
Country flag
Paranoia with private companies will have to go like so many other things that Indians have given up. India was always a capitalist society and will always be. The few decades of socialism will be remembered like a bad dream.
Agree with you.

As first step HAL can outsource larger number of parts to private players to speed up the Production. They can license the technology to pvt. players and recover the cost from them.
 

Khagesh

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,274
Likes
870
Ok baby here is how it is:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...r-parrikar/articleshow/47227416.cms?prtpage=1

What are the next steps in the Rafale deal and how will it be linked to the Made in India concept?

The basic message is that the Rafale deal has been restricted in number. By doing this, we will free about Rs 60,000-65,000 crore - money which will be used for Make in India. Even in the Rafale deal, we will have 50% offsets. So this will take care of partial Make in India. But more than that, we now have money released for activities that can be carried out in improving and speeding up the LCA (Light Combat Aircraft). We can have 10-12 squadrons as MiG 21 replacements.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...r-parrikar/articleshow/47227416.cms?prtpage=1
This is how you do financial management of two problems and churn out two winners instead. That should explain why the whole LCA saga is not a mess of the ADA vs IAF type. Rather it is a mess of the poverty of investments, where those who had the money (politicos) got some pliant babus and careerist IAF guys to do their bidding and start a war with the development agencies. While at the same time not pushing the development agencies as a leadership role needs to. Its a simpler case of a monkey getting the two cats to fight it while he has the benefit of both.

This kind of approach will provide the seed capital for LCAs and AMCAs. Without the GoI committing some real cash, no private sector entity will risk making investments of their own. Business is based on faith and faith gets generated out of investments and commitments.


Regards internal jammer:
The Jammer part was tested but the CAG says that it was dropped from Mk-1 and suggests that this requirement came from the development agencies itself because of lack of space. Please notice they did not say anything about the ability to do it. They already do it for other aircrafts and I suspect an ability much bigger then a plain vanilla EW suite. But the space constraints in Mk-1 are expected. As it is Mk-2 work is progressing rapidly and testing probably can also be seen in that light also. The attached link says it was PV-1 (earliest one which most likely had lots of space, not being fitted with everything), that got the EW suite tested. Though i do wish it is about the LCA Mk-1 itself, given that the PVs have been tested with the suite, still I would wait for the real SPs to get the full suite, which BTW is still under development. Under development, read alongwith the, often cited delays of IFR+Radome being the only things remaining, could be seen as an indication that the CAG report may carry some truth in that respect. I would not hold it against anything. For people who have followed LCA Mk-1 there is no way to convince them of problems being too big. These are not big problems, merely a datapoint that still needs final confirmation.

Seems like the development agencies did not take enough care to go through the report. So this really could be a case of ex-parte reporting also. Cannot deny that too.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ronic-warfare-system/articleshow/45836884.cms

It was a ground acceptance test. The FOC has been scheduled for ever now (probably end 2015 now) but that leaves little time for a space creation exercise.
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
I hold to my point - HAL has avoided setting up LCA Tejas production facilities for far too long. The CAG report says that clearly. I have said before that the BULK of machines needed are generic and ARE NOT SPECIFIC TO TEJAS. Means HAL does not have capability for other "modern" fighter as well.

HAL has been shortsighted and aimless. HAL simply does not know what it wants to do. A proper aviation company would plan BUT NOT HAL.

HAL is failing in EVERY SINGLE PROJECT. Every single project is a story of mismanagement and delays.

Country is more important than HAL. If India loses a war, would you go blame it on HAL??? Does anybody understand what is the cost of defeat. People have become used to easy life in this country. PSU job is a ticket to easy life. This is what we are seeing here.
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
986
There is no point of having Tejas without the numbers as low numbers Tejas will be simply useless in war. It is not a super-duper fighter. Its benefit lies in filling numerous frontline airbases and act as a tripwire.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top