info-board on the program. check out the roles. I think I did mention that SEAD/DEAD was a defined role when someone said that would be a one-off mission(was it you ?). well it’s not, as the info-board says ! and my info wasn’t even based on this board !

^^^ that was ACM Tipnis, ACM Kaul was much before in early 90’s.

juniors will also not be the right word, these were his advisers which means all were senior IAF officers, most Air Marshals at least. IAF was a mixed bag till 2004-2005 or thereabouts until things changed with ACM Tyagi. ACM Major was even more supportive. I’m not sure what impact ACM Krishnaswamy had on the project. Incidentally as a younger officer he had first prepared an eval of the LCA proposal in late 80’s that led to the additional TD phase in the program. A number of IAF officers had varying contributions to the program, starting from ACM IH Latif who started the ball rolling in the first place. The project won’t have been possible without the middle ranking officers of IAF who were actively involved in developing and testing LCA, test pilots, flight test engineers and so on.

Oh, no reason to stop there. A really kick-ass name would be “Fist F**ker” 🙂

only two syllables allowed.

Incorrect, Sens. ASCC (now ASIC) are still in the business for allocating codenames to both FSU/PRC aircraft/helos. Sens there have been several threads over the years on the subject. Where have you been?

http://www.dtic.mil/asic/

………….

It will probably take a couple of years before ASIC codename the PAK-FA. They only meet in a conference about once year and sometimes there is a gap year. Each nation takes turns to host the conference.

TJ

why no J-10 name in that case AFAIK ?

thanks. globalsecurity can be quite loony at times. half that page is pent on describing firkins, origin, uses and so on !

Usually you don’t have the airforce’s logo until you finally hand it over.

not true. example IAF hawks in UK, IN Mig-29K in russia.

First of all, I don;t think anyone can say with abs authority that it was ONLY the new ASR which increased the weight by 1,000 kg. Can you say with absolute certainty that ADA would have met the target of 5,500 kg if IAF had not changed the original ASR?

I would agree with that. due to various reasons, chief among them being lack of experience and cautious approach, even an original ASR LCA would have ended up at a little less than 6000 kg. IAF’s new ASR added the rest. you can have a look at my tentative calculations in the BR thread which gives the itemwise weight components.

Second, IAF gave its first ASR in 80s. Being the end user, they were only interested in the final product being delivered on time. It was the job of the designers and project managers to take into consideration the impact of delays. If they told IAF (at the start) we would give you a product in this year, so be it. Times change & so do the rules of combat. And if IAF had to change the goal posts in 21st century because they did not get the final product on time, then they are hardly to be blamed for it. Having said so, I do believe that more flexibility from IAF would have been better for LCA and indian aviation industry.

please allow me to quote my post on this from BR, I’m a little tired answering this same question again and again.

IAF changed requirements because LCA was suppose to get in service in 90s not in 2015. The requirements are different in 2015 thant they were in 1990s ………

that actually points out how how careless and callous IAF was about the LCA.
anyone connected with the program knew that a project starting in 90-91 had no chance of being inducted in the 90’s itself, 2005 was the best possible date and 2008-2009 a realistic one. and that includes the IAF’s own officers connected with the project.

Fact is IAF never even bothered to set up a realistic ASR for the LCA. it was as if they couldn’t care less and were waiting for it to fail.(which is true if we go by how the then IAF chiefs behaved towards the project from the start) in stead of preparing an ASR that should work in 2010 IAF changed ASR in installments, almost once every 5 years.

when the project achieved a modicum of success IAF was caught on the wrong foot. one fine morning in 2002 IIRC IAF decided that it would use the heavier R-73 and not the R-60 and the wings had to be re-designed adding more time to the program. didn’t the IAF know that it will not use the R-60 on the LCA ? if I’m not too wide off the mark the R-73 itself was in service with IAF by late 90’s. the next change in ASR came in 2005-2006 and it was finally this one that does justice to the LCA and should stay current till 2025 if not more (thanks to a changed mindset in IAF )

The requirements are different in 2015 thant they were in 1990s

that’s a ridiculous argument to be frank. no one in their right minds would have expected LCA to be inducted in the 90’s. even if we assume that IAF officers were babes in the woods and believed that LCA would be inducted by the squadrons in 2000, an ASR is supposed to stay relevant for at least 15 years from induction, if not more. IOW, LCA according to the the original ASR should have sufficed till 2015 at least without needing an upgrade.
why then did the IAF had to do not one but two major revisions in ASR before 2007 ?

the LCA Mk1 induction is happening in 2010-2011, where does this 2015 date come from ?
2014 induction date for Mk2 corresponds to a much revised ASR set in 2005-2006 kindly don’t bring it into this discussion.
either IAF deliberately prepared an obsolete ASR or was not competent enough to prepare a proper ASR, you decide which one it is !

I just wanted to correct someone who wrongly claimed

1) LCA is “certain” to be inducted in numbers
2) IAF was sole operator of Gnats an Jags.

I proved that person wrong.

delusion much ?

no insig, the MKI,MKM and MKA form a type. the later two are derivatives of the MKI.

the MKK, MKK2, MK3 and MKV form another type.

it all started with the su-27PU combat capable trainer. that’s where the similarity ends. the MKI and MKK are significantly different to be called different aircrafts. they are also made at different factories in russia, the MKI at IAPO and the MKM at KnAAPO.