MTA Program by UAC/HAL

[Bahamut]

What I heard is that there was a engine disagreement and IAF needed a FADEC but a new engine means 200% or more increase in cost. In fact making a engine is more complicated then plane it self but plans for FADEC engine as upgrades were kept may after 10 years .FADEC engine increase efficiency and less maintenance but cost more and is difficult to make and repair and in case of failure is less safe as there is no way that engines can be controlled .In the end there is be a thought that does this jet require FADEC system or not as it a low volume plane .If needed we can FADEC engine we can get the ToT from another company but the air frame itself is OK.If IAF was not sure if that engine was going to be FADEC or not then they should have asked.

 

[garg_bharat]

Absolutely.



It has been what, 3 to 4 years since MTA was brought up? Till date there is zero progress on the plane for India.

Personally I would keep HAL away at any given opportunity. They are a delay-making machine.

If at all local integration & manufacturing has to take place (by no means is that easy or will be done quickly, not with HAL), then why not give TATA the opportunity to locally manufacture C-130Js instead? Tata already makes several critical components of the plane like Center Wing Box (CWB) assembly, tailfin, horizontal stabilizers etc. and can easily expand it's facilities for full-scale production in partnership with Lockheed Martin.

Besides, they already are getting the contracts for building Airbus C-295W turboprop transports locally. That means MoD or IAF have no qualms about their capabilities.

We already have a significant level of C130-supporting infrastructure in country and it's always a good idea to improve & expand existing aircraft-types rather than go for entirely new ones.

And make no mistake, we are not learning ANYTHING from MTA production that we won't learn from C-130J production. In both cases, we would only be given enough knowledge/know-how as necessary to locally produce the said plane. Nothing more. The difference is that with MTA, we would be a part of the program and would be funding it's development OUT OF OUR INTEREST. None of the core IPRs will be shared, rest assured.

The only reason why Russia approached India for the project was to share the financial burden. Even if we hadn't accepted, Russia would have gone alone with the project. Like what happened with the early PAK-FA concepts. Don't know if you know about that story or not.

You have not understood the basic premise of my comments.

I am asking you - why did we start this MTA program in the first place if we were not sure of its merits.
Who is a di**head here??

If C130 was the right plane, then thats what IAF should have asked, and commercial agreement should have gone in that direction.

In C130, India would not go beyond structure and assembly, where as joint IPR in MTA will allow India to build avionics locally. So it is not same.

There is a scope to build Russian engines in India. The Russian engines are not bad, our local manufacturer HAL is bad. Russian engine can be built by a Tata or a Reliance as well.

 

[garg_bharat]

If I was the decision maker, I would jump at the opportunity of joint projects with Russia. They still have good tech. India lacks tech, specially in aviation.

India is barely a lower middle class country, but our elite have already assumed the airs of a rich country.

India cannot buy Western equipment in quantity it needs.

 

[Gessler]

You have not understood the basic premise of my comments.

I would actually say it's you who failed to grasp the content of my post. Each of the points you have raised was already addressed by me in the previous post. Now you're back to square one.

I am asking you - why did we start this MTA program in the first place if we were not sure of its merits.
Who is a di**head here??

As clearly illustrated by Prasun Sengupta's statement, it was the Indian side's fault to have made a baseless ASSUMPTION that the engine will come with FADEC, without it even being mentioned in the joint contract. It was only added in a revised requirement from IAF, after finding out that the intended engine that Russia was gonna go with does not come with FADEC.

Our actual intention was always the same : that we wanted an engine with FADEC. The problem was that we failed to make this intention clear to the Russians early on. That's why when you said Russia's stand is correct, I said "Absolutely".

If C130 was the right plane, then thats what IAF should have asked, and commercial agreement should have gone in that direction.

If a compromise can be made (IAF settling for non-FADEC engines), we can go ahead with MTA.

But if we can't, or if we believe that the MTA project is to keep dragging on with additional delays, I suggested that it maybe a better idea to dump it for good and go for the C-130J instead.

IAF on it's part won't go in for C-130J until and unless it is certain that we cannot go ahead with MTA, for whatever reason.

In C130, India would not go beyond structure and assembly, where as joint IPR in MTA will allow India to build avionics locally. So it is not same.

Why not? We already make some avionics for the P-8I Neptune locally.

Plus, as I already said, no-one is going to share the core technological IPRs. NO ONE. Even with the MTA, the only know-how we will acquire is only sufficient to allow us to produce the MTA locally. Nothing more, nothing less. Ask any defence expert.

Same for C-130J.

There is a scope to build Russian engines in India. The Russian engines are not bad, our local manufacturer HAL is bad. Russian engine can be built by a Tata or a Reliance as well.

The problem here IS about the Russian engines. It won't matter who builds them...as long as they don't have FADEC, the IAF will not take them, atleast not for MTA.

 

[garg_bharat]

@Gessler, there is NO move to acquire C130, not even a proposal. As to what we can make in India is theoretical at this point.

You are wrong about IPR, but then this argument cannot proceed without looking at the contract. It is joint IPR for MTA. Ability to make components depends on maturity of industry. I agree that HAL is very poor in this regard.

Russian engine is not a problem. It is a CREATED problem. It is clear that a Russian plane will come with Russian engine.

So here we stand:

1. Antonov is bankrupt
2. MTA is dead (for India at least)
3. C130 is nowhere on the horizon

Maybe this situation is created intentionally to favor Airbus.

The delays and "planning gaps" are tools that people use for getting their ends. Suddenly it becomes a matter of life and death, and very expensive procurement becomes necessity.

 

[Gessler]

@garg_bharat I don't like to say this, but you sir, are a terrible pessimist.

I would like to end my argument there. You seem more intent in declaring an emergency than to try to suggest possible solutions.

 

[garg_bharat]

When people have vested interests, and not national interest in mind, then the only end result is pessimism.

Elite of India have failed this country repeatedly in the last 2000 years. There is a reason for pessimism.

My Guru says that when Brahmin stops sharing knowledge and Kshatriya stops protecting society, then result is chaos - always.

 

[Gessler]

When people have vested interests, and not national interest in mind, then the only end result is pessimism.

I'm sorry you're post was rather interesting so I had to re-start the arguement....

So...you're saying that you have vested interests at heart? Because look here, you said :

"So here we stand:

1. Antonov is bankrupt
2. MTA is dead (for India at least)
3. C130 is nowhere on the horizon

Maybe this situation is created intentionally to favor Airbus."

Either you're a die-hard conspiracy theorist (because you seem to have suggested that IAF intentionally forgot to talk about FADEC prior to latest ASQR, and that Putin, in cahoots with secret Airbus lobby, decided to invade Crimea and cripple Antonov....just so that Airbus (I'm assuming A400M) gets the Indian deal? Wow!) or you actually have a vested interest that favors Airbus.

Because you consider C130 (which is already operated here & component production takes place) as nowhere on the horizon, but instead plant the idea of Airbus out of absolutely nowhere!

My stand is that : if MTA is cancelled, then IAF is best off going for C-130J.

Tell me frankly, what is your suggestion if MTA is cancelled?

 

[garg_bharat]

Wow, what distorted logic you have.

More likely IAF gets nothing. No C130, No A400M. What if it buys MTA with non-Fadec Russian engine in panic.

Eventually the politician will have to rise to the level of Air Force Generals in wickedness.

 

[Gessler]

Wow, what distorted logic you have.

More likely IAF gets nothing. No C130, No A400M. What if it buys MTA with non-Fadec Russian engine in panic.

Eventually the politician will have to rise to the level of Air Force Generals in wickedness.

Lol, so you actually go and prove the opinion I had of you already. As I said :

" You seem more intent in declaring an emergency than to try to suggest possible solutions. "

Well, then. I guess you indeed ARE a terrible pessimist. You're motto seems to be about projecting doom & gloom instead of the more rational thinking like mine.

I'm not sure if you heard of it but there's a principle called Occam's Razor. That if all things being equal (in this case both our predictions being based on possible future events), the simplest explanation tends to be the right one.

I'm like : if MTA is cancelled, the simplest & most logical way forward is to go with C-130J.

You on the other hand, not only fail to give an explanation of why C-130J will NOT be bought, should MTA be cancelled, but also, go on project a doom & gloom picture where the IAF is a stupid idiot who will sit & watch while viable alternatives were right there in front of their eyes.

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to close my argument here. For good, this time.

 

[tharun]

So MTA is dead only two options are left
1)A400 Airbus to make it in india or
2)Go for antonov An-178 it is already bankrupt so we can by the blueprints and our DRDO/HAL will work out.....

I think MTA project based on An-178....

 

[garg_bharat]

@tharun, who will build it? HAL?
If Airbus starts a factory in India, then it is a different case.

 

[tharun]

@tharun, who will build it? HAL?
If Airbus starts a factory in India, then it is a different case.

If not HAL some private will do...

 

[garg_bharat]

@tharun, the issue in India is always very simple - if price is high, quantity gets reduced. Manufacturing is not viable for small quantities.

MTA - how many aircrafts IAF demands?? Nobody will set up a factory for just 50 with no other customer except IAF.

The Russian aircraft is much cheaper, roughly half the cost of a Western plane. Remember it is just a transport, not a fancy plane.

 

[tharun]

@tharun, the issue in India is always very simple - if price is high, quantity gets reduced. Manufacturing is not viable for small quantities.

MTA - how many aircrafts IAF demands?? Nobody will set up a factory for just 50 with no other customer except IAF.

The Russian aircraft is much cheaper, roughly half the cost of a Western plane. Remember it is just a transport, not a fancy plane.

Ok fine why can't we buy some old airbus or boeing passenger aircraft and convert it in to cargo....may be they can't be strategic air lifter but will be good in moving goods and much cheaper too( about 6-8 million $ for conversion)

 

[garg_bharat]

Passenger aircraft cannot be converted to military cargo planes. Different specs.

You are confusing between civil cargo and military cargo.

Military cargo includes vehicles.

 

[garg_bharat]

A C130 will cost India 100-120M. MTA will cost 50-60M. Both will be underused, so life is not a problem.

Transport fleet in IAF is severely underused, as flying planes is expensive. Army prefers to move stuff via rail and roads.

 

[tharun]

Passenger aircraft cannot be converted to military cargo planes. Different specs.

You are confusing between civil cargo and military cargo.

Military cargo includes vehicles.

I know the difference b/w civil and military cargo please read my comment we can use just for cargo like ammo,spares etc

 

[garg_bharat]

See it depends where you need to take the cargo. Within India, heavy cargo always moves via rail and road.
If you want to go to island territory, India has enough ships to take the cargo.

So use of air transport is limited to emergency situations. Or overseas deployment which is very infrequent.

India has enough planes. All Air India planes can be used for military transport if needed.

 

[tharun]

Looking at the specifications of MTA project 20000kg payload same as Airbus a400m..but a400 has four engines but MTA has only two