Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

TRISHUL: LCA-AF Mk.2 Can Still Become A Reality. Here's How:

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Gessler, Aug 15, 2017.

  1. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    3,433
    They held BAE accountable for delays in the HAWK production, thanks to the performance and liquidated damages clauses in the DPP. IAF is even insisting on these clauses, to get more leverage on OEMs, to hold them accountable, but it's more difficult with PSUs, or government owned agencies like ADA or DRDO. They can only complain to the government and they have to take action. But we don't see much accountability required from the government these days.
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  2. zebra7

    zebra7 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    1,274
    Country Flag:
    India
    And the current order is the 20 IOC-2.
     
  3. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    3,433
    They are producing the fighter they at least partially developed and owned for years and even got the first exports. They also are exporting trainers, while we struggle to develop our aircrafts and keep scrapping developments.

    So he is not wrong about that they are doing pretty good now.
     
    ranadd and Blackjay like this.
  4. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1,224
    Country Flag:
    India
    You didn't quote my whole post.

    I also mentioned something about Su-30MKI , Dorniers and hawk trainers. I think you're in hurry and skip the main part of my post.
    They are assembling kits whereas we manufacture more than half of content in India.

    We're doing much better than PAC.
     
    GSLV Mk III likes this.
  5. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1,224
    Country Flag:
    India
    Haramkhori is left
    :victory:
     
    zebra7 likes this.
  6. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    3,433
    Because I am talking only about the aircrafts developed by or with them, just as I only count aircrafts developed by or with HAL.

    LCA - delayed

    Saras with NAL - delayed, cancelled / revived, requirement largely taken over by Do228

    RTA 70 with NAL - cancelled

    MTA with Ilyushin - cancelled

    IJT - failed and cancelled

    HTT40 - only added because IJT failed

    FGFA - delayed and still not under full development

    AMCA - still at concept stage at ADA
     
  7. shaktimaan

    shaktimaan Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2016
    Messages:
    586
    Likes Received:
    540
    Country Flag:
    India
    MK1As aren't order yet?
     
  8. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1,224
    Country Flag:
    India
    Bro, its the bitter truth that
    ONE WHO TRIED , ALSO HAVE A RISK OF FAILURE BUT ON ANOTHER SAID NO TRY , NO FAILURE

    India tries to develop things from scratch that why they got success and sometimes they failed.
    But PAC is only doing either licence production of mushshak trainer or So-called Co-development of improved FC-1

    I don't know why you're ignoring the hiccups caused by during 1999 due to sanctions.
    MTA cancelled because Russia is not agreed for FADEC

    NAL SARAS development stopped because of a single accident. Foolish decision by UPA government. But it is revived as of now.

    RTA 70 was only a concept but scrapped because of MTA arrival.

    FGFA is on line and timeframe is quite good. Any development require Atleast 10 years and it is flying. It may be quite similar to PAC painted thunder.

    I don't expect such statement from your end. But I fully believe in "NO PAIN , NO GAIN"concept.
     
    GSLV Mk III, Zer0reZ, Art90 and 3 others like this.
  9. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    3,433
    If you want to convice yourself with that, go for it. For me the sad truth is, that most of these delays or failures are caused by our own ego or inability to seen, where our capabilities actually are and where we need to ask for help from the start, not only after we messed up things. It's not like we shouldn't try, but do it in a proper way!

    No they are not, since they were involved in the development, since they developed own avionics, since they can integrate weapons on their own and even produce parts for exports and have financial gains from it too.
    So they succeeded in what they planned to do, why HAL and Co didn't!

    Where did I said that? But I don't take that as an excuse for utter failure of project management, the engine or radar development, or even the simple truth, that we never had to make the LCA project dependent on techs that could be sanctioned in the first place. We chose to do it and therefor can't blame others later for the sanctions.
    If we had done it like the Chinese did, with a Russian engines and Russian help. LCA would had been flying for years too. But we wanted higher capability and quality and chose the wrong partners.

    I see things as they are and not as I wished they would be. I dream about an Indian aero industry, that is capable enough to give us the aircrafts we need for defence and civil aviation and that's why I see the LCA program as so important. But that doesn't mean I close my eyes and take all the excuses we hear for decades as the utter truth.

    We have developed composites for example and are using high contents in our aircraft designs, but still all our designs have weight and in most cases drag issues. So we can brag about being so capable to use that many composites as Western countries, or look at the fact that not a single of these aircrafts is developed and operational.

    I prefer real achievements and not just, celebrating 1 test after the other, although the product doesn't fulfill the requirements.
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  10. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1,224
    Country Flag:
    India
    Will you please share only one nation which will get its jf-17 right from PAC Production line?
    PAC is doing nothing other than assembling and producing some parts as China directed them.


    For your question about weight issues, I want to ask you about PAKISTAN's chinese jet. Whether is got any of the Operational clearance. Here we have issues because of hightened desires and continuous changes in the demands.

    In case of N-LCA, It may be a problem but the Airframe is a TD used to get the refences for its PV. Also , Developers made their debut in Naval fighters. Don't you think why there is only few STOBAR jets available in the world?

    There are many projects which are failed in the world like Mig 1.44 , Boeing 2707, XF-84H, H-4 Hercules, XF-85, f-16XL etc. The list is very long and this list also contains the name of FC-1 .

    @vstol jockey @Hellfire @Grevion @randomradio @Abingdonboy
    Your view on below mentioned post.
     
  11. Ankit Kumar 001

    Ankit Kumar 001 Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,599
    Likes Received:
    4,871
    Country Flag:
    India
    From manufacturing screws in 2009 to manufacturing 29 of 51 sub systems of Avionics , 17 out of 19 air to ground weapons , this is a good enough feat, compared to a useless organisation which has been assembling fighter jets 50 years ago. And yet not able to get basic certifications on LCA...

    How many cruise missiles have been tested from LCA ?
     
  12. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1,224
    Country Flag:
    India
    Cruise missiles on LCA?
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Grevion

    Grevion Professional Think Troll ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2016
    Messages:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    Country Flag:
    India
    Everyone is entitled to his/her own views mate. PAC is doing fine in what it was supposed to do ie assemble and supply cheap aircrafts to PAF. This doesn't makes them technological marvels of aviation industry and there is no point in comparing them with HAL.
     
  14. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1,224
    Country Flag:
    India
    Will you please back your overhyped statement.
    AFAIK, PAC is still importing most of it screws too.
    Is it available to your lovingly thunder.
    Also , I even didn't find a jf firing a LGB

    As this discussion going to another way, you may tag me wherever you want to reply.
     
    GSLV Mk III and Blackjay like this.
  15. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    3,433
    And the next set of old excuses, when the fact is, that IAF ordered 40 fighters with basic 4th gen pulse doppler radar, basic RWR, basic BVR and guided strike capability. So is that honestly too much to ask???
    If not what are we complaining about? That they wanted AESA from 2020 onwards? In what world is that unreasonable?

    Exactly it was meant to be a tech demo for IN, but ADA wanted to make more out of it, just to brag about being able to develop a carrier fighter, which only very few nations can. They didn't cared about the fact that they didn't even got LCA for IAF right, but jumped right into the next distraction. They didn't cared about the fact that NLCA is a bad carrier fighter in operational terms, they just wanted the fame to have any carrier fighter.

    If they at least have started it after the IAF version got FOC and is in proper production, one could have justified it. But the way they done it, it's just another prove of how bad the program was managed.

    Of course, but that was not what we were talking about right? @Ankit Kumar 001 rightly said that PAC is ahead of HAL for example wet fixed wing aircrafts and I gave examples, why he is right. The fact that they have lower requirements is not the problem, as long as they meet their goals and not only get their products operational, but also exported. We might not like it, I surely don't, but that's just the reality and we have to improve ourself's to get their too.
     

Share This Page