LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

Defcon 1

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
2,087
Likes
1,534
Country flag
Only in test flying stage. Once you get into IOC stage, the design should be frozen unless some big problems discovered.



If the parts can't be interchangeable, that will be big issue in the quality of your production line.
This is wrong. LCA is following what is called concurrent engineering, where feedback from initial examples is incorporated into later examples to speed up the project.

This is not a quality problem. This is a deliberate choice.
 

Chandragupt Maurya

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
1,954
Likes
4,567
Country flag
This is wrong. LCA is following what is called concurrent engineering, where feedback from initial examples is incorporated into later examples to speed up the project.

This is not a quality problem. This is a deliberate choice.
Correct
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,474
Likes
1,208
Country flag
This is wrong. LCA is following what is called concurrent engineering, where feedback from initial examples is incorporated into later examples to speed up the project.
That is only allowed in the developing stage. Before you get into the mass production stage, every major feature in your design should have already been tested and clarified. After your client confirms your final blue map, the focus will turn to the production procedure. Every supplier of sub-system will start to build up the production line for his part. Changing the design in this stage may force these suppliers to modify their production line, which can potentially waste all their investment previously. Nobody wants that unless the problem will impact the whole plane's performance significantly.

Generally, the new improvement or design features will be added into next major upgrade.

This is not a quality problem. This is a deliberate choice.
We are talking about the interchangeable part here. That is the result of modern standardized production. It will be weird if your part or component is not interchangeable.
 

johnq

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
2,165
Likes
4,324
That is only allowed in the developing stage. Before you get into the mass production stage, every major feature in your design should have already been tested and clarified. After your client confirms your final blue map, the focus will turn to the production procedure. Every supplier of sub-system will start to build up the production line for his part. Changing the design in this stage may force these suppliers to modify their production line, which can potentially waste all their investment previously. Nobody wants that unless the problem will impact the whole plane's performance significantly.

Generally, the new improvement or design features will be added into next major upgrade.



We are talking about the interchangeable part here. That is the result of modern standardized production. It will be weird if your part or component is not interchangeable.
As has already been discussed extensively, past FOC, the parts are accurate down to the micrometer, hence interchangable.

P.S. Aren't you the same guy who was denying Uyghur enslavement in support of the Chinese government in the China Economy thread? :rofl:
 

Defcon 1

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
2,087
Likes
1,534
Country flag
That is only allowed in the developing stage. Before you get into the mass production stage, every major feature in your design should have already been tested and clarified. After your client confirms your final blue map, the focus will turn to the production procedure. Every supplier of sub-system will start to build up the production line for his part. Changing the design in this stage may force these suppliers to modify their production line, which can potentially waste all their investment previously. Nobody wants that unless the problem will impact the whole plane's performance significantly.

Generally, the new improvement or design features will be added into next major upgrade.



We are talking about the interchangeable part here. That is the result of modern standardized production. It will be weird if your part or component is not interchangeable.
Dude I understand what you are saying. This used to happen in older aircraft. But modern aircraft production uses concurrent engineering. Even F35 follows concurrent engineering if I remember correctly. I am simply telling you what is being done in LCA.

The understanding is that the problems encountered due to having non standard parts and subsequent impact on maintenance is worth getting the product early and the ability to incorporate initial user feedback.

Anyways, if you still want more convincing, please go through the following links which demonstrate how concurrent engineering is being implemented in LCA.


In the prototype stage, composite panels were built and matched to specific airframes. For the Mk.1A, tooling will be built up and panels moulded lending themselves to easy interchangeability between airframes, plus spares. The IAF won’t deal with a platform that doesn’t allow at least this level of squadron-level maintainability, so this is priority.
The introduction of more than 270 modifications after accordance of IOC, in the name of concurrent engineering is a potential source of introducing uncertainties during the production phase. This can affect time-lines on a regular basis. These changes even warrant design and manufacturing of new parts which results in delays. All these changes are introduced towards envisaged performance and system improvements as per the requirements of IAF,” says Sridharan, who has been credited with establishing the new LCA Division
 

Dessert Storm

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
1,452
Likes
4,534
Country flag
That is only allowed in the developing stage. Before you get into the mass production stage, every major feature in your design should have already been tested and clarified. After your client confirms your final blue map, the focus will turn to the production procedure. Every supplier of sub-system will start to build up the production line for his part. Changing the design in this stage may force these suppliers to modify their production line, which can potentially waste all their investment previously. Nobody wants that unless the problem will impact the whole plane's performance significantly.

Generally, the new improvement or design features will be added into next major upgrade.



We are talking about the interchangeable part here. That is the result of modern standardized production. It will be weird if your part or component is not interchangeable.
Wowww. Maybe Manohar Parrikar did do a stellar job in pushing Tejas (half baked as you say) down IAF's throat.
 

johnq

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
2,165
Likes
4,324
Wowww. Maybe Manohar Parrikar did do a stellar job in pushing Tejas (half baked as you say) down IAF's throat.
Don't fall for Chinese propaganda. This guy has posted pro-CCP propaganda before in China economy thread and elsewhere. IAF would never accept a half-baked product, and the FOC Tejas parts are manufactured to micrometer accuracy, so they are interchangable. Parrikar was a patriot who drastically improved SU-30MKI maintenance program as well as Tejas program.
 
Last edited:

Dessert Storm

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
1,452
Likes
4,534
Country flag
Don't fall for Chinese propaganda. This guy has posted pro-CCP propaganda before in China economy thread and elsewhere. IAF would never accept a half-baked product, and the FOC Tejas parts are manufactured to micrometer accuracy, so they are interchangable. Parrikar was a patriot who drastically improved SU-30MKI maintenance program as well as Tejas program.
What made you feel, I fell for it. Plainly, I said Parrikar did a stellar job. Plus I have been reading the *footnotes when you reply to this guy.
Don't worry.🙂👍
 

sakalasiva

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
17
Likes
22
Country flag
Is it possible to reduce drag and increase g limit of Tejas with existing air frame
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
4,474
Likes
1,208
Country flag
Dude I understand what you are saying. This used to happen in older aircraft. But modern aircraft production uses concurrent engineering. Even F35 follows concurrent engineering if I remember correctly. I am simply telling you what is being done in LCA.
.......
Ok, clearly you have misunderstanding about concurrent engineering. It is not making the change during the production stage based on customer's feed back.

The main concept of concurrent engineering is not only making every sub-system contractor to start his part of R&D simultaneously, but bring all other department (i.e procurement, maintenance, factories, airforce, etc) to participate the design work from very beginning. So, these departments can start to design their part of procedure along with designing team, as the result, they can save their time. On the other hand, the design team can receive their feedback immediately and incorporate these into their blueprint before the "final product". So, it can reduce the time-consuming and expensive design change in IOC.

In other words, one of major purpose of concurrent engineering is to minimize the modification after IOC.
If someone blames the modification after IOC for the delay of the project, the concurrent engineering approach didn't work as it is supposed to be in this project.
 

FalconZero

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
2,733
Likes
13,189
Country flag
Hope Availability rate reaches 90%+.
Even the USA doesn't have that high rate of availability, they were aiming for around 80%.
Only in test flying stage. Once you get into IOC stage, the design should be frozen unless some big problems discovered.



If the parts can't be interchangeable, that will be big issue in the quality of your production line.
It has been confirmed that FOC parts were standardized so that there's no issue in production and replacement and also that it has been already achieved months back. Again it's about parts standardization and it's been already achieved so stop repeating the same thing.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
5,541
Likes
22,520
Country flag
Tejas. Will. Never. Carry. Brahmos.

Present air-launched one is 2400kg & the BrahmosNG is to be 1500kg (significant delays, so expect heavier).
Tejas max pylon capacity at 1200kg won't sustain those. The LFRJ is the likely supersonic cruise missile for Mark1A & MWF.
 

Saichand K

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
257
Likes
312
Country flag
Let Tejas get integrated with good enough BVR and an aesa first, integrating brahmos should be least of ADA/HAL'S worries.. fully integrated mk1a is yet to be realised.
Exactly what I feel. Tejas excels in A2G role as of now. Further expanding its flight envelope, making it more manuevarble and adding more powerful radars, A2A missiles to its aresenal should be the priority.
 

patriots

Defense lover
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
4,525
Likes
15,206
Country flag
Tejas. Will. Never. Carry. Brahmos.

Present air-launched one is 2400kg & the BrahmosNG is to be 1500kg (significant delays, so expect heavier).
Tejas max pylon capacity at 1200kg won't sustain those. The LFRJ is the likely supersonic cruise missile for Mark1A & MWF.
2 pylon s were mated to carry brahmos in su30

That can be done with Tejas . ...but not needed I believe
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top