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

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
6,330
10,436
Bangalore
Was not referring to the developmental program / building of prototypes for testing but the signing of agreement during the concurrent engineering phase of the Mk-2 in the not so distant future to mitigate the loss of time .
Our defence procurement procedure demands certification before releasing RFP. Unless government should change that there is no such hope.

IAF once did put faith on a HAL project and ordered LSP before certification. Thats HJT-36, but here we are !. CAG even called them out for skipping procedures.

Why would services take such risks? Government should be the one making the necessary changes.

There are 12 HJT-36 LSP version airframes undelivered with HAL.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
19,263
15,412
Mumbai
IAF & HTT-40: From Wanting It Dead To Ordering 70 - Livefist

For those who were in their diapers in 2012 to those who were shilling for Pilatus & only Pilatus & nothing but Pilatus ONLY to then indulge in the usual verbal calisthenics , shifting goalposts about how from certification to first production batch - the program would take 6-7 yrs which neither was the point of this program nor the debate here at all some yrs ago , to all those who'd just like to read the summation of events which were nothing short of a rollercoaster ride of what's one of the rare success stories of the indigenous Indian aero ecosystem & hopefully among the first to harbinger many pleasant tidings of a similar nature to come in the future .
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
19,263
15,412
Mumbai
Our defence procurement procedure demands certification before releasing RFP. Unless government should change that there is no such hope.

IAF once did put faith on a HAL project and ordered LSP before certification. Thats HJT-36, but here we are !. CAG even called them out for skipping procedures.

Why would services take such risks? Government should be the one making the necessary changes.

Do yourself a favour & check for when was the RFP for HTT-40 released by the IAF & when was it certified for airworthiness by CEMILAC .
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
6,330
10,436
Bangalore
Do yourself a favour & check for when was the RFP for HTT-40 released by the IAF & when was it certified for airworthiness by CEMILAC .
I was wrong about RFP. I meant approaching DAC for LSP order after price negotiation. It cannot happen before certification.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
6,330
10,436
Bangalore
How can the DAC place an order without CCS approval ?
Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 9.33.37 PM.png

Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 9.35.31 PM.png

It was IOC, not CEMILAC.

Here is the report: https://cag.gov.in/uploads/download..._Defence_Air_force_Navy_34_2014_Chapter_2.pdf
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
19,263
15,412
Mumbai

I asked how can the DAC place an order without CCS approval NOW since it was obvious even without you enclosing the link & relevant document that the order released at the time of concurrent engg backfired & MoD / GoI forthwith stopped the practice .

Besides for Mk-2 the RFP can be released immediately after successful first flight with benchmarks set on awarding certification of successive performance parameters based on which orders can be placed while testing is on , on successful completion & certification of certain vital performance parameters.

That's different from concurrent engineering as the product is a finished product undergoing testing pending certification & not engineering / development pending testing.


 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
6,330
10,436
Bangalore
The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India has castigated leading state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) for serious lapses in the design and development of aircraft engines including the absence of feasibility studies and project reports, ignoring technical review by domain experts, use of “substitute” and not original materials in manufacturing, that lead to production delay and a loss of ₹159.23 crore as of March 2022.

In its 18th report on defence PSUs for the year ended March 2020 presented in parliament on Thursday, the auditors critically observed that “HAL did not envisage the risks associated with Project 1 which resulted in taking up several unplanned activities. The scope of the project was modified after the initiation of the D&D (Design and Development) activities. Further, HAL failed to anticipate the delay in availability of the originally planned material due to which the Core Engine 1 was manufactured using substitute materials.”

This resulted in, as per the CAG, HAL manufacturing a second Core Engine 2 with the originally planned material. “The expenditure of ₹159.23 crore incurred as of March 2022 was impaired,” the auditors revealed.

The CAG indictment comes after a parliamentary standing committee on defence in an earlier report had also come down heavy on HAL for the inordinate delay of Tejas fighter jet production which is impinging Indian Air Force preparedness due to depleting fleet strength.


The CAG in its report further highlighted deep flaws such as “incorrect assessment of the required thrust and lack of clarity on availability of A Type Engine leading to improper engine selection which in turn had a cascading effect on the D&D process of Project 2 (engine)“. Further, lack of clarity on the resolution of stall and spin issues and improper planning in the initial stages of the development process, led to a delay of more than 20 years in the project that was initiated in July 1999, the CAG pointed out.


The D&D of Aircraft 2 was initiated in 2014 with the internal resources of HAL for the avionics upgrade of the platform. “No business plan was drawn up either before embarking upon the project or during the progress of the project so as to ensure Recovery of Investment (RoI). As there was no firm commitment for Aircraft 1, the entire expenditure incurred amounting to ₹153.98 crore was impaired,” it said.

According to CAG, HAL took up the possible UAV ‘Project 3’ and the D&D was started without seeking specific requirements from potential customers and market exploration or survey was also not carried out either before or after completion. “Despite incurring an expenditure of ₹9.54 crore, Project 3 was not feasible for Defence security applications and therefore HAL could not penetrate the market in an emerging UAV industry,” the auditors remarked.