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

[Kunal Biswas]

Few Points >>

A MoD rethink is underway. The ministry's high-level Defence Procurement Group (DPG) has asked HAL to prepare a life cycle costing of the HTT-40, which is an estimation of what the trainer will cost to buy, operate, maintain, upgrade and overhaul during its estimated service lifespan of 30-40 years. Given that the HTT-40 will be built, maintained, overhauled and upgraded in HAL, the Pilatus will inevitably appear more expensive in a life cycle comparison.

Top HAL sources tell Business Standard that the life cycle estimates make a fleet of 108 HTT-40's trainers cheaper than a PC-7 Mark II fleet by Rs 4,500 crore.

HAL's projections suggest that the HTT-40 will fly at 600 km per hour, reach an altitude of 10,000 metres, fly 3,000 km non-stop, and carry a 500-pound bomb or a mix of weaponry like guns, rockets and bombs. This would allow the HTT-40 to operate as a light strike aircraft, like the Hawker Beechcraft AT-6, which the US is considering for supply to the Afghan National Air Force.

The HTT-40 and the Pilatus PC-7 Mark II are "Stage-1" trainers for rookie pilots, which will replace the obsolescent HPT-36. After basic training, fighter pilots will move on to "Stage-2" training on the Intermediate Jet Trainer, which HAL is developing. After that, pilots will graduate to "Stage-3" training on the Hawk advanced jet trainer. Only after that will they fly IAF frontline combat aircraft.

HAL has committed Rs 40 crore of company money to develop the HTT-40, and is allocating another Rs 160 crore that will also pay for three flying prototypes.

Broadsword

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I am going to leave a example :

One should not always relay on drug to fight off disease he has to make up his own immune system to fight off diseases, apparently our system is addicted to drugs which wont stay in long run rather these same drugs will kill it, this need to be reminded to those who have forgotten that our immune system is more important than Drugs..

 

[pmaitra]

Few Points >>



Broadsword

Nice post Kunal.

Another important point that most people are not aware of, is that the Pilatus comes with the condition that no armament can be used on them. Heck, we are getting these trainers for the Air Force, not for the local flying club.

 

[pmaitra]

I am going to leave a example :

One should not always relay on drug to fight off disease he has to make up his own immune system to fight off diseases, apparently our system is addicted to drugs which wont stay in long run rather these same drugs will kill it, this need to be reminded to those who have forgotten that our immune system is more important than Drugs..

Don't worry, soon, we will run out of drug as well. With the Arms Transfer Treaty, it is high time we develop our immune system.

With the Pilatus, we are still getting the plane, but no armament; soon, we won't even be getting the planes.

 

[arnabmit]

Junk HTT-40 programme and fix intermediate jet trainer (IJT) : IAF tells HAL | idrw.org

Upset with the huge delay in development of an indigenous basic trainer aircraft (BTA), the IAF has now formally asked the defence ministry to approve its acquisition case for 37 more Swiss Pilatus PC-7 to add to the 75 such planes already ordered for Rs 2,896 crore last year.

Defence PSU, Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL), however, is up in arms over this proposal. The indigenous aircraft manufacturer holds its under-development BTA, called HTT-40, will prove to be cheaper than the Swiss aircraft in the long run.

But IAF is not convinced about HAL delivering the aircraft either in time or in a cost- effective manner. "As per our calculations, each HTT-40 will be costlier than the Pilatus by Rs 2 crore-Rs 5 crore," said an IAF source.

The force, in fact, wants HAL to "junk" its HTT-40 programme and instead "fully concentrate" on the development of the Sitara intermediate jet trainer (IJT), which has already been in the making for over a decade but is nowhere near becoming operational.

Amid the ongoing bitter tussle, which the MoD will eventually have to resolve, the fate of rookie pilots being taught the intricacies of combat flying hangs in balance. Faced with a huge shortage in trainer aircraft, IAF has for long projected a requirement of 181 BTA, 85 IJTs and 106 advanced jet trainers (AJTs) for Stage-I, II and III training.

The question of advanced training is already settled with India progressively inducting 123 British Hawk AJTs contracted in an overall project worth Rs 16,000 crore.

IAF went in for Pilatus after its training schedules went for a toss after the entire fleet of the 114 ageing piston-engine HPT-32 aircraft, that long served as the BTA, was grounded in August 2009 after a crash killed the pilot.

The equally obsolete 80 Kiran Mark-II aircraft are being used for both Stage-I and Stage-II training. "We will stretch Kiran for Stage-II training till 2014-2015. HAL should get the IJT ready by then. Otherwise, we will be forced to send some batches abroad for intermediate training," said the source.

IAF hopes to begin its first course on the Pilatus trainers in July, by when it would have received 14 of them. The force wants to ramp up the training for each fighter pilot to 254 hours, with the first 65 on Pilatus, 82 on IJTs and 107 on Hawks. Over 39% of the 1,010 crashes recorded by IAF since 1970, after all, have been attributed to "human error (aircrew)", which is often the result of inadequate training. "Technical defects", caused by ageing machines and shoddy maintenance, is the other equally big killer.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Nice post Kunal.

Another important point that most people are not aware of, is that the Pilatus comes with the condition that no armament can be used on them. Heck, we are getting these trainers for the Air Force, not for the local flying club.

And since these are fully swis made expect them to stop spares sale during the time we will need most.

As for the cost difference, its too early to speak about much. But if similarity in appearance of HJT-36's landing gear to HTT-40s is to say anything then HAL has undertaken a deep research in mean time to have similarity of parts, systems and LRUs in two trainers. Which in other words would mean less per unit cost of both designs.

Anyway what bothers me more is a question, can we as country afford to buy such basic systems ( i say so because we are supposed to be co-developer of fifth generation fighter) when requirement is in hundreds and is to cost billions?

 

[p2prada]

Sanction prone aircraft vs non-existent aircraft.

Wonder which to choose?

Anyway what bothers me more is a question, can we as country afford to buy such basic systems ( i say so because we are supposed to be co-developer of fifth generation fighter) when requirement is in hundreds and is to cost billions?

Even the US is planning on importing trainers. What's wrong with doing the same here? No need to explain where the US stands in terms of aviation. They are planning on Italy's M-346, Britain's Hawk or Korea's T-50. I had offered LCA for the trainer requirement on this forum. The thread is there somewhere. Heck, the US may end up importing 1000 LCA trainer versions for itself, who knows. The T-X program is meant to replace the T-38 for advanced training and also replace F-16 for conversion. However it seems the Yak-130 derivative will end up winning the US competition.

Funny that, US possibly buying Russian jets. Both USAF, USN and maybe even the USMC are corrupt.

In general,
you don't look at combat capability on trainers. Combat capability for such large air forces including India is basically for training pilots while carrying weapons loads and is mostly handled during Advanced training. Combat capability on a basic trainer is not even a requirement. What is more important is its handling and avionics suite. Woe be the day we decide to use trainers against PAF or PLAAF.

 

[pmaitra]

Sanction prone aircraft vs non-existent aircraft.

Wonder which to choose?

Sanction prone + already forbidden to carry armament + existent cost vs non-existent aircraft + non-existent cost.

Pretty simple choice.

In general,
you don't look at combat capability on trainers.

Heck, we are getting these trainers for the Air Force, not for the local flying club.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Sanction prone aircraft vs non-existent aircraft.

Wonder which to choose?



Even the US is planning on importing trainers. What's wrong with doing the same here? No need to explain where the US stands in terms of aviation. They are planning on Italy's M-346, Britain's Hawk or Korea's T-50. I had offered LCA for the trainer requirement on this forum. The thread is there somewhere. Heck, the US may end up importing 1000 LCA trainer versions for itself, who knows. The T-X program is meant to replace the T-38 for advanced training and also replace F-16 for conversion. However it seems the Yak-130 derivative will end up winning the US competition.

Funny that, US possibly buying Russian jets. Both USAF, USN and maybe even the USMC are corrupt.

In general,
you don't look at combat capability on trainers. Combat capability for such large air forces including India is basically for training pilots while carrying weapons loads and is mostly handled during Advanced training. Combat capability on a basic trainer is not even a requirement. What is more important is its handling and avionics suite. Woe be the day we decide to use trainers against PAF or PLAAF.

US is superpower hence immune to arm twisting which we are not. Enough said!

 

[pmaitra]

Frankly, the fact that the Swiss have a nerve to prohibit armaments on the Pilatus was enough to put me off. Why are they in the business of selling stuff to armed forces when they have to lay such conditions? They might as well go back to selling chocolate, watches, . . ., and Swiss cheese.

• Does T-38 come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does BAe Hawk come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does Yakovlev-130 come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does Alpha Jet come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does MiG-29KUB come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does Pilatus come with a prohibition on armament? Yes. Why, O, why? What makes this aircraft so special that the seller can demand such compliance?

 

[Decklander]

Pilatus deal is a Thanks Giving deal for Swiss for keeping their mouth shut regarding the illegal accounts of Nehru-Gandhi family. We do not need this aircraft at all. Buying Cessna-152 wud have been a better deal than this. I have my resons for saying this.

 

[Rahul Singh]

IAF's AFA carries out three stage training program for training aimed at giving flying lessons to trainees and also to test their skills and aptitude for picking them for different types namely fighter, transport and helicopter. Basis for allotment of different wings is a trainee's performer at BPT for BFMs and stage 2 on IJTs for CFMs, which includes weapon deployment (for which presently HJT-16 is at duty and will be replaced HJT-36s, both are armed).

This approach however is different from what is trending in rest of the advance air forces. There, there is also three stage approach, but testing for allotting different wings to different trainees is done right at stage-1 on combat capable or armed BPTs. Rest two stages are specializing stages namely AJTs and CAT/TTA/LIFT.

Given the economics and availability of good simulators, it is now understood that this three stage training is most suitable. That brings to if someday IAF opts or forced to for some reason, this trending style, then how AFA will carry out weapon deployment aptitude tests (not the same terminology) on unarmed and worse never-can-be-armed newly bought Pilatus-7s?

Won't it be better idea if IAF asks HAL to develop HTT- 40 with such specifications so as there is no requirement for IJT stage and at same time asks HAL to cancel HJT-36 as IJT and develop HJT-39 instead as advance tactical trainer for CAT/LIFT stage?

Needed to mention that HJT-39 draws heavily from HJT-36 and is basically a longer, two engined, swept winged, heavily armed, supersonic version of HJT-36 . And whose development after almost completion of HJT- 36 and LCA-T the two seat trainer/fighter is no more challenge.

Few bold decisions can set IAF right and apace with best of the world.

HAL HJT 39

 

[Rahul Singh]

Pilatus deal is a Thanks Giving deal for Swiss for keeping their mouth shut regarding the illegal accounts of Nehru-Gandhi family. We do not need this aircraft at all. Buying Cessna-152 wud have been a better deal than this. I have my resons for saying this.

Even NAL HANSA could have done lot while in meantime HAL could have been developing HTT-40. But alas!

 

[arnabmit]

I do agree with you... However since it is the basic aircraft meant to provide only the first wings to a pilot... maybe at the civilian PPL level, does it really matter if it can be armed or not? If allowed, would Pilatus be able to or rather capable to perform any war duties at all?

Frankly, the fact that the Swiss have a nerve to prohibit armaments on the Pilatus was enough to put me off. Why are they in the business of selling stuff to armed forces when they have to lay such conditions? They might as well go back to selling chocolate, watches, . . ., and Swiss cheese.

• Does T-38 come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does BAe Hawk come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does Yakovlev-130 come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does Alpha Jet come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does MiG-29KUB come with a prohibition on armament? No.
• Does Pilatus come with a prohibition on armament? Yes. Why, O, why? What makes this aircraft so special that the seller can demand such compliance?

 

[p2prada]

Sanction prone + already forbidden to carry armament + existent cost vs non-existent aircraft + non-existent cost.

Pretty simple choice.

Then you don't really know how air forces function.

You see, they have these bigger jets which carry the bombs. And then they have these smaller aircraft, should I say tiny aircraft, that is used to train the pilots before they progress to bigger jets.

You see, it is the bigger jets that need to be combat capable. The tiny jets, they don't. As a matter of fact, even for advanced trainers nobody really gives two flying hoots for combat capability.

Even in the American T-X program, combat capability is not even being looked at. And this is for an advanced trainer requirement, like our Hawks.

US is superpower hence immune to arm twisting which we are not. Enough said!

Lol. It doesn't work as simply as that.

France sanctioned Mirage support during Kargil war for both Pak and India. We worked around it through the Israelis. In the future our own industries will be able to work around such sanctions.

[*]Does Pilatus come with a prohibition on armament? Yes. Why, O, why? What makes this aircraft so special that the seller can demand such compliance?
[/LIST]

Why are you so hell bent on combat capability for a BTA? It is not a requirement.

 

[p2prada]

HAL has the money to run all three programs on their own, without govt funding. If IAF isn't interested, eventually IN may become interested. Heck maybe the Army Aviation may eventually be interested in 10 years or so, if they manage to bring CAS aircraft within their wing.

HAL can even develop these aircraft for export. Many companies around the world are doing it without govt support.

HTT-40, HJT-36 and HJT-39. Plenty to interest the global market.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Lol. It doesn't work as simply as that.

France sanctioned Mirage support during Kargil war for both Pak and India. We worked around it through the Israelis. In the future our own industries will be able to work around such sanctions.

Why ad hoc when comprehensive can be available with little effort? BTW did you read what Er Bhadoria said

"It is easy to see what benefits India's aerospace industry. The Rs 38.5 crore that we pay for each Pilatus PC-7 Mark II goes entirely to Swiss manufacturers. Of the Rs 34.5 crore that each HTT-40 will cost, India's aerospace industry will get Rs 29 crore; only Rs 6 crore will go abroad,"

Need i tell how this economic value would benefit upcoming projects? Do i need to remind that unlike US we are not mature and these small baby hand holding helps a lot in striving for.

 

[p2prada]

Why ad hoc when comprehensive can be available with little effort? BTW did you read what Er Bhadoria said

"It is easy to see what benefits India's aerospace industry. The Rs 38.5 crore that we pay for each Pilatus PC-7 Mark II goes entirely to Swiss manufacturers. Of the Rs 34.5 crore that each HTT-40 will cost, India's aerospace industry will get Rs 29 crore; only Rs 6 crore will go abroad,"

Need i tell how this economic value would benefit upcoming projects? Do i need to remind that unlike US we are not mature and these small baby hand holding helps a lot in striving for.

All that's great for HAL. But what about IAF?

HTT-40 will fly in 2015, will undergo flight tests until 2018, maybe even 2020 if we add delays. Then they will take two-three years to deliver. We are sitting in 2013 and will be expecting a HTT-40 in 2021. Should IAF wait a decade for 37 measly BTAs?

So how about simply ordering the 37 PC-7 today, instead of waiting for an entire decade. Even the remaining 60-70 PC-7s can be delivered very quickly at very low prices. IAF has a 182 BTA requirement today, not in 2022.

That 34.5 Crore will become 100 Crores in 2022. Instead pay 38.5 Crores today and fly the already flying Pilatus far into the future. Heck inflation in India is 7-10%, WPI. Inflation in Switzerland is -0.6%, CPI. It is so obvious which of the two is cheaper.

Economic value for the industry does not equate to military value for the air force. Military budget is always a statistical loss to the economy.

You need to stop looking at PSUs profit margins and instead focus on what's important.

HAL is making claims. Don't buy it.

 

[p2prada]

Do i need to remind that unlike US we are not mature and these small baby hand holding helps a lot in striving for.

HAL can afford this project without IAF's helping hands. They are going to do the same, anyhow.

If HAL really wanted to "learn" they can channel some of the huge profits they are making in the MKI and pretty soon the Rafale contracts. They are planning a $6 Billion into their own manufacturing setup. They don't need to look at IAF's order books for running small trainer programs.

Even car companies spend more than the investment required for HTT-40. That Renault Logan taxi R&D costs Rs 700 Crores from design to production. HTT-40 could be done in less than half that cost.

 

[arnabmit]

Any news at all on HJT-39? It was supposed to be our advanced trainer + dedicated CAS craft as well.

HAL has the money to run all three programs on their own, without govt funding. If IAF isn't interested, eventually IN may become interested. Heck maybe the Army Aviation may eventually be interested in 10 years or so, if they manage to bring CAS aircraft within their wing.

HAL can even develop these aircraft for export. Many companies around the world are doing it without govt support.

HTT-40, HJT-36 and HJT-39. Plenty to interest the global market.