A committee set up by the IAF has indicated to Air Headquarters that the Snecma offer will not meet the Air Force’s operational requirements, nor help India acquire the technological know-how to indigenously develop a combat engine.

The offer would also not help India get a co-designed, co-developed engine but rather an engine under a licence production arrangement, and at a great financial cost.

Explained a member of the committee: “It would be better if GTRE and other laboratories working on the Kaveri brought the engine to its logical conclusion even if it took a few more years. At least we would have mastery over the core technology. This will be better than importing the French core, paying a lifelong royalty, but saying the Kaveri is our indigenous effort. Neither the French nor anybody else will give us the know-how on the core technology.”

I think the GOI might like to make it clear to France that the prospects of actually ordering Rafale – should it be selected in the MMRCA – will be considerably damaged if… if… SNECMA is now backtracking on an earlier agreement to JV the Kaveri up to the level where the LCA would meet air staff requirements.

I suggest that India should

a) restrict foreign engines to the first batch of Tejas
b) subject to the current Kaveri being integrated onto the Tejas successfully, order a batch of “low performance” Tejas MkI
c) trace and hire whatever foreign engineers have the expertise to develop core technology to the point required by the Kaveri for the Tejas to meet ASR
d) order a batch of “high performance” Tejas MkII with the higher thrust engine

With a potential for 100+ higher thrust engines being required for the MkII, spending 1,000 crore more rupees to gain the indigenous technology to make them would be a cost effective investment. The cost of powering the MCA – if pursued – would also be very much reduced.

Everything that doesn’t fit… is obviously a typo…

…you get a combat radius with external fuel for Gripen NG of 16030 km and on internal fuel only of 1000 km or 540 nm.

Whoops! The NG must use some pretty impressive drop tanks. 🙂

Thus, upon addition of even the improved Kaveri engine (85-90 kN), Tejas will achieve over M 1.8 and 9G.[/b]

Currently Tejas has achieved 1.6 M and 6G.

I hope that is not Tejas’ top speed with the current engine.

Mach 1.8 is 12.5% faster than mach 1.6, so drag is increased by ~ 25%. Wouldn’t mach 1.8 require about 25% more thrust?

Nevertheless for an aircraft industry which has had to travel by far the furthest in the shortest amount of time out of any of the current major world powers, the Tejas remains an impressive achievement and I don’t think there’s any denying the benefits it’s bestowed on Indian aircraft technology and indigenous R&D.

What is the point of spending time and money acquiring the know how to build fast jets if it is not to be used to build fast jets?

Would I be right in thinking that the LCA with a Kaveri engine would have met the original capability required had it not been for the IAF raising the bar? I don’t think that the IAF appreciated that the purpose of the project was to give India a 4th gen aircraft design capability. Adding to the capability requirements as the project went along was bound to make it more challenging and bound to slow it down. I think that 2 versions should have been designed, a MKI meeting original ASR and a MkII meeting revised ASR.

I hope that with foreign participation a higher thrust Kaveri engined MkII that meets revised ASR can get into production as soon as possible.

I think they started with an ok design. After some time they added weight for various reasons, because Kaveri was to be better then F404. However Kaveri is a really failed project.

That could account for the IAF thinking they could add extra capability (and weight) without the performance of the aircraft being compromised to a point they found unacceptable. Not saying that was the case. Just saying it could have been the case.

most posters here are pretty much unaware of the realities..there was no reason for Saab to want India to join in on the Gripen program from the start. first of all, India didn’t have a very big defence budget then and the money available for spending on defence R&D was paltry to say the least..and even if India had joined the program, what would they have done to help ? there was little expertise and little know-how- it was all wasted after the HF-24..Saab on the other hand, had a captive SwAF customer base, which at that time at least, had a large requirement of over 200 Gripens. now, since the demand is low, they’re happy to share the technology in order to get more customers.

and then again, in those days, European partners would never part with top-notch technology..even France’s Dassault, from whom India had bought the Ouragan, Mystere and Mirage-2000, had offered an analog FBW for the LCA, which prompted ADA to go to Lockheed Martin instead..that one fact alone is responsible for at least 3-4 years delay, due to the post-Pokhran sanctions and seizing of data by LM..had Dassault given the ADA help in developing the all-digital FBW instead of offering an analog one for the LCA, that wouldn’t have happened. maybe it might have flown earlier with an analog FBW, but that one factor alone would’ve made it due for upgrades within half a decade of being inducted.

as for Sweden, they’ve never been a partner for India in defence, and apart from the Bofors guns, there is very little of Swedish origin in the IAF (some EW pods)..

and yet, when ADA did approach Ericcson for the PS-05A radar to be used on the LCA, the Swedes only wanted to install it as-is without parting with any technology related to the PS-05A, and as a result, the deal fell through..for a piddly slotted array radar, they were unwilling to share the technology, so why on earth would they share technology relating to how to build a fighter with India ?

unfortunately for India, Russia had no major expertise with digital FBW in the late 1980s and that led ADA to choose Dassault as initial design consultant and then use LM as its partner for FBW..as it is, the Mirage-2000 was the best jet in the IAF then and ADA wanted a fighter as nimble and multi-role as the M2k was..

and the argument that India should end this LCA program to make its defence stronger is ridiculous and short-sighted..China never made good airplanes when it began, but today they’re attempting a 5th gen fighter on their own..thats only possible due to the confidence and knowhow built up over decades of building and flying their own fighter derivatives and finally with the J-10..even with the JF-17, they’ve been cautious, and haven’t inserted as much technology as they could..but, iteratively, they’ll improve upon it till it finally becomes a good enough 3.5 generation fighter. the same is happening in India..

and for those complaining about the LCA’s avionics, thats just utter trash..anything that was of Indian origin on the Su-30MKI is from the LCA program only. the indigenous Jaguar DARIN-II and MiG-27 upgrades are based on technology developed for the LCA. those alone have saved millions of $ that would’ve been spent keeping factories in UK or Russia alive.

as for those complaining about its cockpit layout and comparing it to the Rafale or Gripen, do a cost analysis as well..the LCA will end up costing around $25-30 million per unit, whereas the Gripen is probably around $50-55 million per unit and even more for the Rafale..there was someone complaining that the FoV on the indigenous CSIO developed HUD is only 25 deg and less than that on the Typhoon..what they ignore is that its more than the Thales supplied HUD and costs probably half or a quarter of what the HUD on the Typhoon costs.

and while its layout is probably a generation behind Rafale or Gripen, its of the same generation as the Mirage-2000-5 Mk.2 which is what IAF’s Mirages will be upgraded to..no one in the IAF is asking Dassault to upgrade the Mirage’s cockpits to Rafale standards, are they?

I for one, know what the LCA will provide the IAF- a cheap, capable, multi-role fighter that can be very useful to bulk up the IAF and still be as capable or more as the bulk of our immediate neighbourhood’s fighters..I mean for God’s sake, the PAF intends to use the JF-17 as its mainstay for the next 30 years ! and we’ve never heard any reports of just how great it is..but to the PAF’s credit, they’re willing to take the JF-17 and work on it to make it a decent fighter. I guess thats what happens when you face a cash crunch.

The most perceptive post about the LCA that I have read. Thank you for that.

Here is the link …. Full Scale Engineering Development started in 1993.

2. The programme was streamlined and it is a much better aircraft now.

Sorry guys, Leh trials of the LCA went ahead successfully. Engine troubles will be sorted out in due course. Astra is well on its way.

SO …. LCA is coming. Whether you like it or not.

And do note that the thing with engine and the possible number of aircraft was known a couple of months before that idiot Ravi Sharma decided to sensationalize the issue.

The Flight article mentioning the purchase of enough aircraft for 2 squadrons (40 I guess) appeared in February 2008. Only 20 have been ordered, though, as I remember.

What is the current order proposal – 20 with GE-F404 engines (confirmed) + 20 more with GE-F404 engines (to be ordered)? Surely the only way to get 2 squadrons equipped with Tejas from 2010 is to have them all powered by the same engine.

I recall that it was announced that the Kaveri would be installed in 1 aircraft, such installation to be completed by the end of 2009. I hope that can be done in 1 year but it does not sound too likely. Even if that target is met, how long would it take before deliveries of Kaveri-engined Tejas could start?
2011? 2012?

BTW pleased to hear the cold and high tests worked out.

On account of the lengthy period of thirty years over which the project will extend, the calculation of total life-cycle costs includes an allowance for uncertainties.

Mmmm… an allowance for uncertainties? I think that must just be for the F-35, since IIRC the SAAB offer is an all in package at a fixed price.