quadbikeThere are some news around that the americans are threatening India with sanctions if they do not reduce (give up?) oil imports from Iran. That got me thinking immediately at things like F414 for Tejas Mk2, P-8, Hercules , Apache etc etc .(possibly even israeli sourced stuff like Derby , radars and other etc. )
Will we see a repeat of 1998? Poor Tejas will be finding itself in the same trouble, again , if any of this happens.
No because India will just give up on Iran faster than you think.
Sadly.
quadbike[QUOTE]
When you state that, how on earth can you justify the LCA being dropped and a Gripen being acquired instead? India will forever be importing fighters from other nations if that were to happen.
I never wanted LCA to be dropped for the Air Force for the Gripen or anything, I just wanted the Gripen to be the MRCA, that is it. I was always in support of the LCA, and argued with the likes of Teer that the IAF should place more orders of LCA MK1 rather than shifting the goalposts all the time.
As for the rest of the stuff you wrote on the LCA, its all in the past and there have been a lot of discussions on that. At the moment, the IAF has a stated intent of purchasing 6 LCA squadrons. the IN has committed money to prototypes and has now ordered 9 N-LCAs. These are committed funds, which indicate a firm backing for it. There is neither interest nor intent to acquire the Gripen or Sea Gripen since at the very best, it offers a bit more than the Mk2 will, whereas it will cost more and will give India’s aerospace industry precious little when we already have an MRCA.
Again I want this to happen as much as you do, the problem here is the slow pace at which LCA MK1 FOC is going, look how long it took for the LSP-7 to take to the skies, then they have to redesign the whole thing for the MK2 why not stop being too ambitious drop the NLCA and concentrate on the MK-2. The IN was committed because Navy unlike AF appreciates the value of indigenous development and has always been willing to take an indigenous product which is 80% the capability of a foreign one. But they are running out of patience as per the CNS they feel let down by the ADA.
And as we’ve seen in the Swiss evaluation, the Gripen NG isn’t as hot as it’s made out to be on these forums. Its good for its size, but its not that good that we ought to dump our own program to go for it. The IN will have the option of the Rafale and will guaranteed find it better than any paper Sea Gripen that they will need to fund. Even if we are to assume that the Sea Gripen program was problem-free and that it were as capable as the Rafale (which is not going to happen since its smaller and Saab has precious little experience building a naval fighter), the IN can simply have HAL build Rafale M’s..a far far less riskier approach than funding a Sea Gripen that no one else has ordered or will operate.
As swerve said the Swiss evaluation was for the Gripen C/D & not the NG. We are not to dump our programme for the Sea Gripen we must dump it so that the rest of the programme most importantly the MK2 can move forward faster, this is the reason why there was talk about cutting the B version of the F 35. One thing the Sea Gripen will have over Rafale is lower operating costs, i.e provided the IN wants something with a similar operational footprint of the NLCA then Sea Gripen not the Rafale M is the obvious choice. As for SAAB’s inexperience in sea based fighters, I am sure if they start it now they will finish it before the definitive NLCA takes to the skies (seas).
So you believe that an ejection seat means that you can take any risk despite knowing that a certifying agency will not approve of it. I give up. Believe what you want. It wont change the facts I’m afraid.
The Manufacturer believes there won’t be any issues, so hopefully it won’t come down to that.
yes, it is wavering..which is why just a fortnight ago, they committed funds to order 9 N-LCAs. :rolleyes:
Yes 9 prototypes and thats all while the chief is saying he is disappointed.
the Sea Gripen won’t be any more effective than a N-LCA. Nothing on it makes it more effective. If the IN wants a more effective fighter than the MiG-29K then they have the Rafale M to look at. Bring the avionics on board to the F3+ level and the IN doesn’t need to bother about any paper designs
It may be on paper but given funding the Swedes can get it ready before we can get the NLCA ready.
Navy chief says ADA let it down on LCA front
quadbikeIndian engineers will reach that level, but only if they start from the bottom, when you learn something you learn it step by step, look at the complexity of the LCA, India’s second fighter project compared to the Chinese ones or the Russian ones when they started off, they aimed at achieving something they can, rather than trying to build the best fighter in its class. If you bite more than what you can chew, you will end up with exactly the position where the LCA is, too far down the line to drop the project, yet too many problems to have it operational. I am sure if we went for something less complex, say without the complicated FBW, Western derived engine, the delta, the use of composites etc, we would have had an operational fighter many years ago, and from then on we could have already been developing the AMCA, a more sophisticated platform. It is not easy to skip generations and somethings are only learnt from experience.
I agree that the IAF is partly to blame, pampered as it is with the best of what Russia & the West have to offer, they are shortsighted and think that HAL would one day be able to Magically produce the fighter of their dreams. I am sure there are murky secrets to why that choice being made by the IAF, we just don’t know that yet.
As for the Saras, the difference is that it is essentially a transport/passenger plane the risks are higher, there is no ejection mechanism etc.
May be they should just concentrate on meeting IAF requirements with the MK 1 and making the MK 2 a reality rather than spending time and resources on building what will be a very limited Naval fighter. Especially at a time when the Navy’s commitment to the platform is wavering.
India’s carriers have limited deck space and unlike the IAF they cannot afford to have a fighter which is less effective when they can get something more effective.
quadbikeIt would be good to see an Argentine competition with Rafale going against Gripen.
quadbikeHow good are the Iranian MiG 29s are they as obsolete as the Serbian ones were during the Kosovo war ?
quadbikeYes, of course they can build one “just like that” because they’ll be immune to any engineering issues (because you believe so). The only issue of course is to find someone who can believe them enough as to bankroll them.
Experience and Expertise counts, Indian engineers have a long way to go till they reach the level of the SAAB,Dassault,Boeing,EADS guys so for them at this point it would be rather easy. They have a much better product in the Gripen to begin with.
Not going to argue on the other subject you want to play by the rules, fine take it slow and easy and NLCA will soon be not needed by the Navy.
quadbikeYou realise how ignorant you sound ? Just read what you wrote once again. Every government agency / public sector company in its day to day operations requires several licenses and adherence to several guidelines associated with safety. What happens in the case if there is an accident and the subsequent enquiry finds the design implementation and testing team guilty of not adhering to the safety guidelines resulting in loss of human life, government property and private loss, should it land in an inhibited area ?
I know there are rules, in govt-govt deals these can be broken and should be if we need to speed things up. If we are fine with importing stuff all the time then let it be like it is, follow the rules, procedures, and deliver the product when it will be considered obsolete.
A plane which exists in power point presentations v/s one doing EGR. You really are an optimist.
SAAB can just build one just like that, their experience is immense compared to ADA/HAL, if they get project sanction and funding now, I am willing to bet the Sea Gripen will overtake the N LCA programme, despite the headstart NLCA has.
quadbikeSo what you’re saying is that military certification is just eyewash and since a pilot can eject (if the situation is such that a pilot can eject), you can willy nilly approve any method or any part.
You’re only highlighting just how little you know about aviation in the real world.
p.s.: if an LCA crashed its precisely your kind of people who’ll jump up and down with suggestions about how the Sea Gripen or Gripen has now fully emerged from the shadows.
It is not eyewash, but if the makers are happy with the plane and the pilot is happy they should fly it, the company is owned by the government as is the certification authority what is the point in these delays.
May be I don’t know much, but the whole purpose of having government regulators is to make sure the private players don’t compromise on safety, if its government owned who cares, all money is government money whichever department/company it is in.
No if it crashed and expanded its flying envelope there by making it closer to FoC and induction i will be rather happy.
Sea Gripen has more chance than the LCA because people there know what they are doing, I am sure SAAB would have been willing to co-operate with NLCA more than EADS or Boeing, would have been happy with the role of a junior partner etc.
quadbikeJ-10B vs Rafale ?
Rafale I think will win on everything including Fancy cockpit, Airframe, etc etc.
May be J-10B will have a better radar ? Certainly has a bigger nose !
quadbikeOh that is not a military aircraft, and in that sense the Chinese regulator is being tough because the aircraft will eventually need FAA certification, which it won’t get if it don’t pass stringent tests. NLCA don’t need that they can just look the other way and take it easy on the ADA. Let it fly and then integrate things redesign for safety etc can come at a later stage, even active fleets are grounded and modification done to make them safe during a later time, I guess it don’t matter much.
China has many successful programs so it can afford to play the tough game now. Still I am sure if the aircraft in question was a priority as LCA is to us, the certification would have done ages ago.
The pussyfooted approach with respect to testing has already cost LCA dear, who wants a 100% safety record when flight envelope expansion is so slow, one or two jets are always lost in the process of testing in most countries, its the norm. Look at the Gripen, F 16 etc, they had several crashes initially but aggressive testing meant they has their flight envelope expanded to paper specs faster.
quadbikeThere are some Mercs that perform poorer than the Abarth 500.
quadbikeLets hope no such issues are going to happen again.
The current SL Govt. literally takes orders from New Delhi. You don’t seem to understand the strategic significance here.
This may be true, but the price for that was paid by the people of Kilinochi, Rajapaksa by pledging support to Delhi effectively ruled out any Indian intervention.
I have no problems with you Quantum or ordinary Lankans in general, just happened to see a BBC documentary preview (before its aired thanks to a friend) on what happened in Kilinochi following the war.
quadbikeMaybe you should fly it, afterall even you can eject easily and flying is such an easy job and from your posts, it seems you know much better than those worthless(idiots) engineers at HAL and CEMILAC.
I am sorry if i hit a nerve, look at China or any other country where the certification authority and the company that develops the plane are both government owned, I doubt they cite small issues and delay the first flight.
I was just saying that this is ardent red tapism, don’t need to be a rocket (or aviation) scientist to figure this out.
PS: I don’t think flying a modern jet with automated everything is such a demanding task, as demonstrated by many journos during AI and otherwise, a few hours on the simulator and off you go. Not like you are asked to break the sound barrier for the first time.
Actually I do have a lot of respect for the work he does, and others like him do, that is why I want the whole establishment to be privatised so that he can get better pay better promotion and rewards for his work.
I dont understand why the certification authorities would not give certification because of an over weight part, that is a performance issue not a flight safety issue in itself unless the excess weight was compromising the structure of the aircraft or HAL were not able to prove the or certify the structure with the additional load.
Like I said its the same as the water authority turning off the taps to the electricity department because some bills are not paid, don’t matter even if its all government owned, the pain of bureaucracy !
quadbikeThat news about Rafale’s life-cycle costs has been refuted a while back.
That don’t mean its cheaper than the Gripen, If the Gripen made the initial cut it would have definitely been L1 for MRCA
quadbikeLets agree to disagree and move on preserving the sanctity of the thread.
Sign In
