LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
4,383
7,091
Bangalore
This is a 2015 statement, a lot has changed since then.
The PDP Phase-2 funds hasn't been released for Mk.II, thereby rendering this timeline useless.

The Mk-1A will follow this timeline instead, first flight in 2019 and IOC/FOC in 2020/'21 respectively.
Offical source of funds not being released ? And why would Mk1A follow IOC/FOC iteration again?
 
Dec 4, 2017
238
411
France
Offical source of funds not being released ? And why would Mk1A follow IOC/FOC iteration again?

How can i find source for something that doesn't exist?!
The amount sanctioned in 2009 was for Preliminary Design Review (PDR) phase, after completion of which the design was frozen, back in 2014. Additional funds should have been released for detailed design phase and PV construction after 2014, which hasn't been released even now under FSED Phase-3.
Instead, the funds have been reallocated to Mk-1A program.

Defence Minister Arun Jaitley, replying to another query, said the ADA is also developing MK-II version of LCA for the Navy with a higher thrust engine than the one used in MK-I version of Tejas.
"Final Operational Clearance (FOC) of LCA (Navy) MK-II is likely to be obtained by 2023 for induction in Indian Navy and FoC for Air Force MK-II is likely to be obtained by December 2025," he said.

According to this statement, the govt will meet the above timeline is those funds are released in 2018.

And why would Mk1A follow IOC/FOC iteration again?

Mk-1A will have to go through the same certification process for its new subsystems and ordinance being integrated, albeit with lesser number of milestones. Also, Mk-1A won't have an IOC, only FOC. That was a mistake on my part.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
4,383
7,091
Bangalore
How can i find source for something that doesn't exist?!
Are you saying Mk2 doesn't exist? :rolleyes:

The amount sanctioned in 2009 was for Preliminary Design Review (PDR) phase, after completion of which the design was frozen, back in 2014. Additional funds should have been released for detailed design phase and PV construction after 2014, which hasn't been released even now under FSED Phase-3.
There are many projects under LCA,. I think you are confusing.
LCA towards FOC
LCA Mk1A (under HAL now)
NLCA towards Mk2
AF LCA Mk2

Screenshot-2017-12-8 LCA Tejas - News and discussions(3).png

Screenshot-2017-12-8 LCA Tejas - News and discussions(2).png

Screenshot-2017-12-8 LCA Tejas - News and discussions(1).png

Screenshot-2017-12-8 LCA Tejas - News and discussions.png


"Final Operational Clearance (FOC) of LCA (Navy) MK-II is likely to be obtained by 2023 for induction in Indian Navy and FoC for Air Force MK-II is likely to be obtained by December 2025," he said.
Yes, this timeline is correct for Navy version.
 
Dec 4, 2017
238
411
France
Are you saying Mk2 doesn't exist? :rolleyes:

Ofcourse the Mk-2 exists, but only in paper for now.

There are many projects under LCA,. I think you are confusing.
LCA towards FOC
LCA Mk1A (under HAL now)
NLCA towards Mk2
AF LCA Mk2

I know about the different projects under LCA program. And I've the ADA yearly reports till last year. In none of those where I able to find evidence that the funds were released for Detailed Design Review (DDR) nor for prototype construction under FSED-3.

Another thing i found out was that in the earlier ADA reports they talked about a potential IAF order for 110 Mk-II airframes, while in the latest one they have stated that now IAF wants 108 Mk-1A. Common sense dictates that any funds for Mk-II would be put on hold until necessary funds for Mk-1A development is allotted first.


Yes, this timeline is correct for Navy version.
Yes, and IAF version will only come after the Navy version takes to the air. To meet the above mentioned timeline, GoI has to release the funds for DDR FSED-3 only by 2018 at the earliest.
 

ashkum2278

Member
Dec 4, 2017
24
20
New Delhi
What i would love to see with the tejas is that rather than having it as a swing/omni role aircraft. It would be better to have it in two versions. We can have the Tejas MK1 purely optimized for the ground/surface attack role where in its primary function would be CAS/Recce. In this way we would have specialized pilots for ground attack roles. We can have the Tejas MK1A optimized for the Air to Air Role. We need to follow the ISRAEL Airforce structure where in they have pilots/platforms suited for either the AIR to AIr role or the Ground attack role/CAS for ground forces. The principle idea being that some pilots are good in the AIR to Air role and some in the bombing role. All pilots cannot be efficient in both the roles.

So if we have tejas also confired and optimized for specific roles, in that way we would also be able to make full use of the available weapon hard-points. Also rather than arming all the aircrafts with individual dedicated jammers, as they would eat into one hardpoint. It would be bgetter to go in for Esraeli escort jammers. Wherein one air carft can take on the jamming role and free the other aircrafts hardpoints. So that they can be loaded to the teeth.

@Aashish
Just my 2 Cents$$$$
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Shashank

Shashank

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
858
947
Ban galore
Arup Raha goes after PSU's for delay in LCA and batter for more foreign fighters.



Public sector undertakings producing defence equipment are managed at the top by people with little knowledge about the demands of the defence services, former Chief of Air Staff Arup Raha said on Wednesday.

They don't stick to the deadline and lack in quality control, he said.

Raha was delivering the "Think" lecture on "Statecraft and Diplomacy: Role of Military Power".

The Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry in association with The Telegraph had organised the meet.

"There is a timeline for producing weaponry and the process can't go on endlessly. Take for instance HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd)... there's labour problem because of unions, the quality control isn't good because there is no mechanism of certification by any external agency to check airworthiness," he said.

"So, we are taking risks. The problem is there's no fear of getting fired. Thankfully, efforts are now being taken to increase accountability."

The country's 24th chief of air staff (December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2016) spoke about the threat perception and India's preparedness to inflict "serous punishment" on those trying to disturb its sovereignty.

"If you don't stand up, you give in to a bully. And for that a nation requires great military capability," he said. "We need to have critical technologies. While some organisations like Isro (Indian Space Research Organisation) and (the) department of atomic energy has been top notch, the DPSUs (defence public sector undertakings) haven't produced much to meet the objectives that the nation has set for strategic independence."

As chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, Raha had been at the centre of several initiatives and policy-level dialogues on military capabilities and diplomatic role of the defence services.

Brushing aside allegations of corruption in major defence deals, the former air chief said the procurement process was elaborate in India and the financial bids for any deal were scanned by several organisations, including the finance ministry, the ministry of defence and the auditors among others.

"There may be small-time corruption here and there. But for major deals there are several tiers. You can't slap corruption charges on the bureaucracy or on defence services representatives. They are experts on the job and they bargain like Shylock."

The South Block has recently come under criticism for the Rs 59,000-crore deal to procure 36 Rafale fighter jets, built by Dassault Aviation, France.

Raha defended the deal saying 36 wasn't enough when the requirement is for 126.
He said the shortage would create "inventory management problems", adding that in 10 years many aircraft with the airforce would be obsolete.

"Tejas is a good aircraft and we need to produce it in good numbers to fill the gap. We need to encourage indigenous aviation technologies. Even the US took at least two decades with the F-16. You need to give some time," he said.

Source : Ex-air chief trains guns on defence PSUs
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironhide

Pundrick

Well-Known member
Dec 2, 2017
346
358
Why Building More Tejas Fighters Is A Superior Option For The Indian Air Force

Why Building More Tejas Fighters Is A Superior Option For The Indian Air Force

"Once again looking at the UAE as a recent example, one finds that it spent some $3 billion on the design and development of the F-16 E/F Block 60 variant alone to create a customized aircraft to address its needs. This customization included adding features such as conformal fuel tanks, integration of internal forward looking infrared (FLIR) and electronic warfare (EW) systems, a new General Electric F110-GE-132 engine and a Northrop Grumman AN/APG-60 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar to the baseline F-16 C Block 50/52 aircraft that forms the backbone of the USAF fleet. However, source codes for the new radar and the ability to integrate or carry weapons systems that are export-restricted by the USA citing ITAR are not available to the UAE thereby circumscribing the latter’s ability to project force in its region. The technology that went into making the specific variant of the engine developed by General Electric was also not available."

The same sort of situation is likely to take place in India’s case as well. No cutting edge technology will be transferred, any marketing talk about ‘technology transfer’ notwithstanding. As, Keith Webster, Senior Vice-President (Defence and Aerospace), US-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF) in an interview with The Hindu BusinessLine said “It will never be full ToT. It is not in the national interest or industry’s interest. Certain technologies are not transferable to anyone in the world. Billions of dollars are spent over decades to make military-grade engines and what makes military-grade engines unique in the world is hot-sectioned technology and codings and those are crown-jewel technologies. No one is going to hand that over. So anyone who says they will is not being honest. They will not.”


Nevertheless, the UAE is on track to yet again upgrade its F-16 Block 60 aircraft and buy a further 30 F-16 ‘Block 61’ aircraft which will feature advanced weaponry and spares and maintenance support. The subsystems, maintenance and spares are estimated to cost $270 million[2] while the aircraft themselves are estimated to cost nearly $2 billion. Upgrading existing Block 60 aircraft to Block 61 standards is expected to cost another $1.63 billion. In addition to this, the UAE has also requested purchase of various munitions and associated spares, training and logistical support to the tune of $4 billion (2013) [3]. These include 5000 GBU-39/B SDB, 8 SDB Guided Test Vehicles, 1200 AGM-154C JSOW, 300 AGM SLAM-ER, 30 Data Link Pods etc. India has similar weapons systems under production or development at the moment. However, initial flyaway aircraft will need to be equipped with American munitions adding significantly to the cost of such a purchase apart from the very real need to integrate Indian munitions. UAE has also expressed an interest to procure 3250 GBU-31V1, 750 GBU-31V3, 1000 GBU012, JDAM kits and bombs for an estimated cost of $300 million. All these sales to the UAE carry a note of not altering military balance in the region while contributing to the foreign policy and national security of the United States [4]. Apart from the high upfront outlay of any significant purchase of F-16 Block 70 aircraft, India will also incur significant recurring costs for type specific ammunition, spares, training and maintenance. It is worth pointing out that Indian precision guided munitions development has matured, and training and maintenance costs will be reduced by having greater numbers of the Tejas, that will sport these indigenous armaments, apart from reducing overheads related to maintaining multiple types of fighter aircraft.

"Now Brazil’s $5.4 billion (2014) deal with SAAB for just 36 Gripen E/NG aircraft also includes transfer of technology clauses [5]. However, technology to which SAAB does not hold IPR will be difficult to obtain without striking a separate deal with each IP rights holder. Any technologies that are transferred in the case of the Gripen E/F will be essentially restricted to those that are lower down the totem pole in terms of importance."



NOTE : Read the full article by visiting the link posted above.
 
T

Tarun

so total 7 aircraft with flying daggers by end of 2017?
Actually, the count should be 8 by year end because sp-5 from 2nd production line and another one from 1st line are planned for december.
Rest 3 at 1 LCA per month will give a total of 11 by end of FY 2017 (as per HAL plan).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironhide and TARGET