Trainer Aircraft of IAF - PC-7, HTT-40, HJT-36, BAE Hawk

Gautam said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1892243140129776111

Sitara To Yashas: To Hell & Back, Ready To Serve - Livefist
Click to expand...

www.deccanherald.com

India's first home grown basic trainer aircraft HTT 40 expected to be delivered to IAF by September

A Hindustan Turbo Trainer-40 made an impressive performance at the inaugural fly past at Aero India 2025 here.
www.deccanherald.com www.deccanherald.com

There's no mention of the IAF leasing / procuring 4 HJT -36 Sitara / Yashas for evaluation in the DH article . Be that as it may there's no news in either article of CEMILAC certification as well or at what stage of certification it is at .

IIRC HVT did suggest in his tweets last year that the HJT-36 was undergoing some sort of certification. This leaves open the question of its IOC & FOC.

Wonder if the contract of its purchase is going to be signed anytime soon ? Assuming a few years passage to go through our torturous bureaucratic procurement procedures , if we get the first IJT in 2030 it'd be 32 years since the project was launched.

Must be some kind of record. Of the dubious kind.
 
_Anonymous_ said:
www.deccanherald.com

India's first home grown basic trainer aircraft HTT 40 expected to be delivered to IAF by September

A Hindustan Turbo Trainer-40 made an impressive performance at the inaugural fly past at Aero India 2025 here.
www.deccanherald.com www.deccanherald.com

There's no mention of the IAF leasing / procuring 4 HJT -36 Sitara / Yashas for evaluation in the DH article . Be that as it may there's no news in either article of CEMILAC certification as well or at what stage of certification it is at .

IIRC HVT did suggest in his tweets last year that the HJT-36 was undergoing some sort of certification. This leaves open the question of its IOC & FOC.

Wonder if the contract of its purchase is going to be signed anytime soon ? Assuming a few years passage to go through our torturous bureaucratic procurement procedures , if we get the first IJT in 2030 it'd be 32 years since the project was launched.

Must be some kind of record. Of the dubious kind.
Click to expand...

HAL shouldn't be allowed to carry out R&D on aircrafts alone anymore. ADA must be involved.

The R&D is being done in silos and knowledge sharing is extremely limited.

We at this stage cannot afford re-inventing the wheel again and again.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: YoungWolf and Subgradewalker
Ankit Kumar said:
HAL shouldn't be allowed to carry out R&D on aircrafts alone anymore. ADA must be involved.

The R&D is being done in silos and knowledge sharing is extremely limited.

We at this stage cannot afford re-inventing the wheel again and again.
Click to expand...
Wrong take. In fact, we need more companies that can handle design, development, and production. That's like advocating for merging ARDE/CVRDE with OFB.

There are no silos when ADA's responsibility is limited to design and R&D. They can work with any number of players. It can be with NewSpace for Abhimanyu UCAV. NAL worked with Mahindra for civilian aircraft design. You cant do that if only HAL exist who has the expertise. DRDO and its labs are the one thing that we got right early. It helps us to build and eco system. It breads competition which is always good.

An innovative ecosystem is most vibrant when there are multiple companies competing. Boeing vs LM, Sukhoi vs Mig, China artificially made two companies under one main DPSU to create competing ecosystem. CAC vs SAC under AVIC. All these ecosystems are powered by academia or dedicated public R&D institutions. For example, all US defense primes are supported in research and development by publicly funded labs such as AFRL, NAMRL, DARPA, or a number of universities.

I don't know what you mean by reinventing the wheel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YoungWolf and Tatvamasi
Ankit Kumar said:
HAL shouldn't be allowed to carry out R&D on aircrafts alone anymore. ADA must be involved.

The R&D is being done in silos and knowledge sharing is extremely limited.

We at this stage cannot afford re-inventing the wheel again and again.
Click to expand...
Our sense of development is lop sided. Most cos have an in-house R&D team propelling development leading to mass mfg.

In our case we emaciated the R&D team at HAL to create ADA solely to design the LCA. To what end , we don't know.

Since then HAL hasn't quite got its R&D act together . Since then they also haven't successfully designed any aircraft to be honest. The results are seen in the struggle to design the Basic Trainer & the IJT which they've gotten right after decades of trial & error.

Remember this is the very same HAL which successfully designed the predecessors of these Basic Trainers & IJT which were / are still in usage .

I believe the first item on the agenda is for HAL to resurrect its R&D department come hell or high water if it wants to remain relevant as an FA OEM in the future otherwise it's doomed to be only a production agency & that's not exactly an ideal spot to be in for it'd make HAL the only FA mfg co in the world to have no / sub standard R&D team around the world.

Their record in hptr R&D & mfg is impressive though. That should be the template to follow. @Milspec
 
  • Like
Reactions: YoungWolf and darshan978
Ashwin said:
Wrong take. In fact, we need more companies that can handle design, development, and production. That's like advocating for merging ARDE/CVRDE with OFB.
Click to expand...
Not in areas where we (the govt, or the companies themselves) cannot fund 2 such projects.

Let's say for full fledged development of a jet engine we need 100 units of money.

And let's say 2 seperate entities will need atleast 180 units of money.

It does not makes sense to have 2 seperate initiatives when we are struggling to fund even 20 units of money.

Ashwin said:
There are no silos when ADA's responsibility is limited to design and R&D. They can work with any number of players. It can be with NewSpace for Abhimanyu UCAV. NAL worked with Mahindra for civilian aircraft design. You cant do that if only HAL exist who has the expertise. DRDO and its labs are the one thing that we got right early. It helps us to build and eco system. It breads competition which is always good.
Click to expand...

The requirement of replacing Kiran's in IAF fleet is alarmingly more crucial currently than nurturing industrial capacity.

And HAL on its own has proven a big failure in actually absorbing the tech and designing and developing the IJT till now.

Whereas we can see noobs like Turks even progressing so much more rapidly in building trainers. And their trainers being actually accepted into NATO countries (Spain).

Its better that the IJT was jointly led by HAL and ADA. That's my PoV.

Ashwin said:
An innovative ecosystem is most vibrant when there are multiple companies competing. Boeing vs LM, Sukhoi vs Mig, China artificially made two companies under one main DPSU to create competing ecosystem. CAC vs SAC under AVIC. All these ecosystems are powered by academia or dedicated public R&D institutions. For example, all US defense primes are supported in research and development by publicly funded labs such as AFRL, NAMRL, DARPA, or a number of universities.
Click to expand...

Having 2+ entities doing R&D in towed artillery is well and good. Because both of them can fund the R&D for such a system and both of them can together co-exist even in a 307 ATAGS order.


But 2+ entities doing similar things where we do not have the resources to fully see through the efforts of even 1. That's not wise.

All the examples you gave, they had the financial capacity individually to see through the projects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darshan978
Ankit Kumar said:
I have my doubts.

No updates on LUH. A big concern imo.
Click to expand...

I've a gut feeling the LUH is another huge controversy in the making. The design issues haven't been resolved & in between an HAL ex test pilot turned into a whistle blower taking the issues public writing a letter to this effect to the IAF.

Here's the low down on the various issues plaguing the LUH on Google Search.


The IA has already sent feelers to the Tata Airbus H-125 venture expressing interest. Now this hptr design is more than 50 years old .

No doubt it has undergone upgrades in between but the design itself is of a 5 decade vintage. What's more interesting is one of the variants is in service with the Paxtani armed forces.
Ankit Kumar said:
ALH thanks to German DNA is more or less stable.

Waiting for LCH to actually sport the ATGMS and SPS to make it combat capable.
Click to expand...
 
  • Agree
Reactions: darshan978
Ankit Kumar said:
Not in areas where we (the govt, or the companies themselves) cannot fund 2 such projects.

Let's say for full fledged development of a jet engine we need 100 units of money.

And let's say 2 seperate entities will need atleast 180 units of money.

It does not makes sense to have 2 seperate initiatives when we are struggling to fund even 20 units of money.
Click to expand...
We are not spending money on same project to multiple entities. LCA money was spend on ADA not HAL. HAL is the production agency. They do limited R&D on components.

You really need to understand the distinction between D&D and production.

Ankit Kumar said:
The requirement of replacing Kiran's in IAF fleet is alarmingly more crucial currently than nurturing industrial capacity.

And HAL on its own has proven a big failure in actually absorbing the tech and designing and developing the IJT till now.
Click to expand...
The same can be said about failure to deliver LCA on time. ADA was no different. Result would have been same for IJT if ADA was involved back then.

If HAL is so incompetent, how do you explain ALH?

Ankit Kumar said:
Whereas we can see noobs like Turks even progressing so much more rapidly in building trainers. And their trainers being actually accepted into NATO countries (Spain).
Click to expand...
TAI is basically a private entity with Turkish Armed Forces Foundation holding majority. Its not under administrative control of their MoD. They dont have reservation or any other faulty HR policies. Baykar is a crony company owned by son in law of erdogan.

Lets not compare it with HAL.

Ankit Kumar said:
Having 2+ entities doing R&D in towed artillery is well and good. Because both of them can fund the R&D for such a system and both of them can together co-exist even in a 307 ATAGS order.


But 2+ entities doing similar things where we do not have the resources to fully see through the efforts of even 1. That's not wise.

All the examples you gave, they had the financial capacity individually to see through the projects.
Click to expand...

We are pursuing three separate fighter projects in parallel as we speak. We no longer lack resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tatvamasi and marich01
darshan978 said:
yeah but 1 month to go. i never said its fake news.
Click to expand...
You misunderstood. I'm saying don't rely on a fake news factory as a source for anything. Search for its validity, because if it's valid, it means they copied it from someone else. If no one else is talking about it meaning its made up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darshan978
_Anonymous_ said:
Our sense of development is lop sided. Most cos have an in-house R&D team propelling development leading to mass mfg.

In our case we emaciated the R&D team at HAL to create ADA solely to design the LCA. To what end , we don't know.

Since then HAL hasn't quite got its R&D act together . Since then they also haven't successfully designed any aircraft to be honest. The results are seen in the struggle to design the Basic Trainer & the IJT which they've gotten right after decades of trial & error.

Remember this is the very same HAL which successfully designed the predecessors of these Basic Trainers & IJT which were / are still in usage .

I believe the first item on the agenda is for HAL to resurrect its R&D department come hell or high water if it wants to remain relevant as an FA OEM in the future otherwise it's doomed to be only a production agency & that's not exactly an ideal spot to be in for it'd make HAL the only FA mfg co in the world to have no / sub standard R&D team around the world.

Their record in hptr R&D & mfg is impressive though. That should be the template to follow. @Milspec
Click to expand...
HAL's R&D team is ARDC. They have done a phenomenal job with rotary as you mention.

they are to small , and don't get the mandate to take on larger projects. Eventually they have to perform or perish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_, Sathya and darshan978
Sathya said:
GE is blaming supply chain problems for the delays. Equally worrying has been the British ejection seat problem .
Click to expand...
No, i meant that htt40 ueses non ge engines.
And IJT uses russian ejection seats while htt40 uses martin baker. How can HAL use 6 units from ijt?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom