Yahoo, thanks for that AWST article. Pretty informative from a technical point of view. Found out the significance of why the LCA’s wing root extends so far forward of the intake…

Most of the dates mentioned in the article can pretty much be trashed but a good read nontheless.

Regarding the South African development of avionics… During apartheid, no country was willing to touch it… except for Israel. Israel and SA had many joint ventures and quid pro quos regarding military and nuclear technology.

Finally we can bury the 1983 “start” date that’s mouthed by lazy reporters including R. Bedi.

Project definition stage was completed late 88. So the actual development of the plane started around early 89. I am assuming it took a few months to get the tranche of money for developmental phase. Btw, that is an underestimation of the time in the Indian bereaucratic system but we’ll go with that.

excellent, I’m glad we solved the question about the beginning date of the LCA program. That wasn’t so bad.

So, what in your opinion is the start date? 🙂

Yes, they have. Spain builts the CASA transport planes and has built the CASA 101 trainer aircraft years ago. If they would have the money they could built such a fighter.

That’s exactly the point! The countries that can build a plane from design to manufacture phase also have long pedigrees in doing the same.

When India started the LCA project it had no design infrastructure and all of its design skills acquired from the Marut project were allowed to atrophy… Basically starting at square one.

What country or consoritum would have wanted to let India, a country that brought nothing technically or, at that time, financially to the table and allow it to have complete technical and specification authority?

BTW, the proper description of LCA’s wing is compound delta. Please none of this cranked delta business.

JAWA = Jane’s All World Aircraft

A fighter that is too complex to be used as a simple and rough little CAS fighter, too short ranged to be a striker and too limited in range and combat power to act as a fighter.

The Gripen’s specs wrt to the bolded parts above are about the same as the LCA’s. Would you have the same misgivings about the Gripen?

So in the end it will be a point defense fighter with limited air to ground capability.

Did it occur to you that maybe, just maybe, it was the IAF that drew up the specs for the LCA that the Industry has been trying to meet? What? The end user drawing up the specs for equipment? What a novel idea!

For the industry however it does mean that they went from being a pure licensce production industry to becoming a system builder, capable of designing everything from engines up to a complete airplane.

Yet I doubt if tha was worth the money spent on the project.

You are admitting that the project is allowing the industry to be come mature enough to be a complete system designer and builder, yet question if that was worth it? Hmm… Interesting. So, it would be more worth while in money and time to just continue to license build without acquiring any more capabilities and continue the cycle of licence building with nill inhouse design capabilities?

By any chance, would you be an advocate of only having the US, EU, Russia, and China as the only entities having the ability design and build complete systems?

The pace of flight tests have slowed due to two reasons:
– The main flight testing facility is experiencing monsoons
– The PV2 is being readied in the mean time for first flight later this year

The LCA program has four main goals:
– To move the Indian aerospace industry forward in terms of design and manufacturing capability. This move forward is more of a skip forward which is meant to leap frog certain technologies and phases.
– To move the avionics industry forward, again attempt at leap frogging
– To reduce dependence on other countries for the “meat and potatoes” of the air force
– To produce a fighter for the air force that is at least a peer in its threat environment

When the LCA enters service, all of those goals will be met to varying degrees. Obviously, the biggest gainers would be the design and manufacturing industry while the avionics industry’s gains would be much more modest. In the process, the air force will have a fighter that is much better than the plane it will be replacing while still being relevant within its threat environment.

Now, what part of that program doesn’t make sense?

Why you are so sure that ADS will be there in 10 years? It can be 50 years.

Actually, it will take 57 yrs to build the ADS, by which time it will be obsolete and children of current AFM forum members will start threads like:

” Does the ADS program make sense?”