insomnia.delhiHow difficult is detection of the missile accurately from boost to mid to terminal and how hard would the detection be due to the various speed and trajectory(e.g case of a depressed one or a short range, medium range and ICBM) of separate ballistic missiles?
insomnia.delhiThe claim from Janes was about the first production Gripen in 1992.
When will the first Tejas Mk.1 leave the production line?!
If the plane in 92 was a production model of Gripen, then perhaps you should realise that the first Tejas has already left the production line and was recently testing its ground weapons release, short range air to air missile release, and performance in hot, cold, low, high conditions.
Like Pakistan in the late 80s India was banned from US military items too.
And how would that effect the LCA program?
(The engineering development did not even start till 93)
The first technology demonstrator, TD-1, was rolled out on 17 November 1995 and was followed by TD-2 in 1998, but they were kept grounded for several years due to structural concerns and trouble with the development of the flight control system.
Specific control law problems were tested on BAE’s simulators(and on HAL’s, once theirs became available). As it was being developed, progressive elements of the coding were checked out on the “Minibird” and “Ironbird” test rigs at the ADE and HAL, respectively. A second series of inflight simulation tests of the integrated flight control software were conducted on the F-16 VISTA (Variable In-flight Stability Test Aircraft) simulator in the U.S. in July 1996, with 33 test flights being carried out.
However, Lockheed Martin’s involvement was terminated in 1998 as part of an embargo enacted by the U.S. in response to India’s second nuclear tests in May of that year.
followed by another delay, and a solution to that, and another problem and a solution for that.
That is how any product development takes place, you work, sit down and assess, resolve the problems and keep on going towards the final vision, you make it sound so sinister.
The LCA’s maiden flight was made by TD-1 from National Flight Test Centre (NFTC), near Bangalore, on 4 January 2001 compared to the first flight of the Gripen prototype on 9 December 1988. 8 years later in 1996 the Gripen entered service with F7 wing at Satenäs in June.
Precisely
The first flight of the technology demonstrator, which was required to secure further developmental funds from the GoI/MoD, once with the funds secure the project is right now estimated to take 13 years into full operational service with all the requirements integrated.
What is so surprising about that, especially when people here are considering this skewed comparison with the Gripen development program?
April 1998
An AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile is launched for the first time from a Gripen aircraft.
A Gripen fitted with a ‘mock-up’ air-to-air refuelling probe, conducts flight tests in the UK with a Royal Air Force VC-10 tanker. The trials include a ‘dry’ connection in-flight with the VC-10 NATO tanker.March 1998
An agreement is signed with Ericsson Saab Avionics, to become the main supplier for the electronic countermeasures system in the export version of Gripen.December 1997
The first dual-seat Gripen (39B) is delivered to FMV.October 1997
Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish Air Force, Lieutenant General Kent Harrskog, declares the first Gripen squadron operational at a ceremony at F 7 Wing, Såtenäs.June 1997
The Swedish government gives FMV authority to sign a contract for Batch 3 of the Gripen, comprising 64 aircraft plus a development and improvement program; the contract is signed at the end of JuneDecember 1996
The basic development work on the Gripen is concluded and the first Batch 2 aircraft is delivered to FMV.
http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations/GripenStory/GripenStory.htm
And this is precisely how such programs should be run, with a company like SAAB, administration like FMV, and a air force like the Swedish one. That is to say a firm commitment as the plane keeps on developing.
insomnia.delhiFrom 1974-2008 India was under the embargo of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
When Pakistan did run into similar problems in the 80s.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/
No more talk of fully capable Gripen flying in 1992, why?
Tis funny, India was not under sanction for use of military technology by any nation, the sanctions were for nuclear material.
The Light Combat Aircraft Story
Air Marshal MSD Wollen (Retd)
As a precaution, Full Scale Engineering Development would proceed in two phases. Phase 1: design, construction and flight test of two Technology Demonstrator aircraft (TDI & 2); construction of a Structural Test Specimen; construction of two Prototype Vehicles (PVI &2); creation of infrastructure and test facilities. Phase 2: construction of three more PV ‘5, the last PV5, being a trainer; construction of a Fatigue Test Specimen; creation of facilities at various work centres. Cost of Phase I – Rs.2188 crores, of Phase II – Rs. 2,340 crores. Phase I commenced in 1990. However, due to a financial crunch, sanction was accorded in April 1993 and was marked by an upsurge in work.
insomnia.delhiSo what did the LCA-people do for a decade with the hundreds of millions they got? Spend the money and time on parties and hookers? They seems to be a bunch of smart people….
😀
They developed labs, technologies, etc. etc. related to the LCA.
I will make it a little easy for you, imagine if i gave you money and told you to build me a car, and you know nothing about building a car, what would you do.
insomnia.delhiThe data are from Janes 1992.
First flights:
Prototype Dec 9th 1988
First production model Sept 10th 1992Here are the data from Saab.
http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations/GripenStory/GripenStory.htm
December 1995
The 2000th Gripen test flight takes place. More than 90% of the scheduled test flights are now complete.
December 1996
The basic development work on the Gripen is concluded and the first Batch 2 aircraft is delivered to FMV
April 1998
An AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile is launched for the first time from a Gripen aircraft. The test is carried-out at FMV’s Vidsel test range in Sweden and is the first AMRAAM trials launch ever conducted outside of the USA.
A Gripen fitted with a ‘mock-up’ air-to-air refuelling probe, conducts flight tests in the UK with a Royal Air Force VC-10 tanker. The trials include a ‘dry’ connection in-flight with the VC-10 NATO tanker.
It is decided that Saab AB is to be listed on the Stockholm Stock Exchange. 35% of the shares and capital are purchased by British Aerospace (now BAE Systems). The Investor AB group retains 36% of the votes and 20% of the capital.
It does seem that the program progressed as it went along, perhaps a saner strategy than the media reported InAF demands of FOC or fail, however in InAFs support if that was the policy SAAB has a much defined history.
With some outside help and the will to take the related cost a design from the 80s took ~15 years to enter the ranks.
India decided to buy MiG-29s after running into international problems with its atomic programs. The shortage of funds for all other military programs was another fall-out from that. The SU was willing to give the credits for its military exports to India and the Indian military are still grateful for that.
Just in the 90s it was learned by India that Russia has no longer a replacement of the MiG-21 at hand and option to take the production of the Mirage 2000 was missed too. Just the recovery of relationship with the USA did allow to give the LCA a new lease of life.
India has still missed to select the final engine for the Tejas and with that a real option to break into the world fast jet market from 2015 at least. At a time-scale when several hundred surplus F-16C will become available.
Perhaps while quoting SAAB for all the reasons and data for the gripen you should do the same with DRDO.
And the sudden appearance of F-16Cs would be due to the inductin of seveal hundred F-35s into service in the 2015-2020 time scale? what would be the fly away cost plus the cost of avionics and structure updates?
insomnia.delhiJAS 39 Gripen
The funded definition and development began in June 1980.
First squadron operational in 1995.LCA
Development approved by Indian government 1983 as MiG-21/Ajeet replacement.
First squadron operational in 2***.T-50
The mother program, code-named KTX-2, began in 1992,[6] but the Ministry of Finance and Economy suspended KTX-2 in 1995 due to financial constraints.[7] The basic design of the aircraft was set by 1999.[1] The development of the aircraft was funded 13% by Lockheed Martin, 17% by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), and 70% by the government of South Korea.[8]
It was designated T-50 Golden Eagle in February 2000, with the final assembly of the first T-50 taking place between 15 January and 14 September 2001.[1] The first flight of the T-50 took place in August 2002, and initial operational assessment from 28 July to 14 August 2003.[1] KAI and Lockheed Martin are currently pursuing a joint marketing program for the T-50 variant internationally. The South Korean air force placed a production contract for 25 T-50s in December 2003, with aircraft scheduled to be delivered between 2005 and 2009.
You do realise that the T-50 is a trainer developed by two very technologically advanced nations, and has no weapons or radar system integrated for the F/A-50 version.
It will have them soon with both nations working on it by 2013.
Gripen carries on a tradition of designing fighter pilots and a wide base of centers created to constantly develop this capability, and it is not in anyway possible comparable to a T-50 or Tejas. It can take off from a road, do its role of JAS come back, land on the road and turn around for another one of the JAS missions. It has been flying as you note for sometime and has explored the export market a lot, even with recent sales, and now after all that time moving on towards the enhanced version, which should be ready for complete technical trials by InAF for its MMRCA by the end of this year (as otherwise it will face a faliure to meet the tenders requirements).
This interest with the time it takes to develop the plane is strange, stranger still is comparison with three completly unrelated planes.
insomnia.delhiDon’t know if its already been mentioned but there are two aircraft with similar specs. The JAS-39 Gripen and the KAI T-50 Golden Eagle, both have been flying for years and are powered by the GE F404 engine.
For non-US engines there’s the JF-17 or FC-1.
Somehow the cost jump between a mig-21 and any one of these planes does not seem to make any logic.
JAS-39 Gripen is an established aircraft, and has been around for a long time, it has all the tests done, all the weapons (from several sources) integrated, all the flight time in the world. So if JAS-39 is put in this club, it one to ask the question, where is the doubt (for a buyer that is), or perhaps its a notch above the 25-30 million dollar per bird.
Is there really a market for such planes out there? (For e.g Myanmar apparently decided to buy the MiG-29 and that too the K version.)
FA-50
But T-50 co-developer Lockheed Martin opposed the move, citing protection of its technology, DAPA Commissioner Yang Chi-kyu told a National Assembly session Sept. 25.
“In general, aircraft source code cannot be transferred to other nations. To install the U.K. equipment on the FA-50, the aircraft’s source code would have had to be shared with the company concerned, which was impossible,” Yang said.
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/12/205_37021.html
Fighter versions due in 2013, lot of american gear on it, integrating is a costly business, one that requires time, consulting to shorten the time and adds costs to the aircraft.
Many nations might hesitate with a russian engine as many more will with an american engine, the russians might have a problem if it comes in compitition with a market in the sphere of influence (will take a cheap shot and cite the Myanmar situation), it has a strong case with operators of the j-7s(like the PAF), and even more so at very interesting financing schemes. The biggest advantage is that PRC has developed its own inventory of weapon, if they fit it with a domestic engine PRC can provide for every need of a nations air force, perhaps for some nations that might be a put off, a lot of upgrades are planned, which will take time.
People have forgotten a huge operator of Mig-21 type, Indian Air Force, which has been crying for a long time now for a plane to replace the type from service, with all the initial numbers reserved for what would be an urgent replacement (as soon as they clear the tests).
Taking a lot of assumptions, what possible advantages and disadvantages will a fully developed Tejas mark-2 have?
It will have a american/european engine, which can go both ways, reading about a lot of nations that operate the mig 21s/ j 7s, i think the tendecy to place sanctions will be a disadvantage, even if the new kaveri engine with french tech comes to be, there is still a european hand in it, its not like they will just put a russian engine on it without wasting considerable time and money.
Radar is Israeli, too much work integrating another one, Avionics are domestic, weapons can be a combination domestic, Israeli and Russian weapons are already being integrated for the different versions.
insomnia.delhiI´ll guess that is a NO.
Of course that is a no, there is this website called google………
Does not mean that what you said is true by any measure
Ok…So the LCA Mk1, is going to be produced with no radar or BVR-capability? Wow, that is awsome, producing an early 1950s jet in 2010. India should buy the blueprints of the SAAB J-29 Tunnan instead. At least that fighter had a radar…..
insomnia.delhiSince you seems to know everything, please inform me. Has functional radar been installed in any of the LCA demos? Has it worked according to planned and fired a BVR missile? Is that the radar LCA has chosen to be the its radar and what´s its name?
So you somehow take that as proof that there is no radar for LCA program?
the IOC is without the integration of the BVR combat capablity, the FOC is after all the several tests have been explored and all capabilities have been integrated.
A radar has more funtions to perform (other than providing targeting information to a BVR missile).
insomnia.delhiOk, TY. So the decision to go ahead with the Mk2. was actually in March of 2003? I did´nt even know an official decision had taken place.
But that is the official website of LCA? Not very user friendly if you ask me, there must be millions of programmers in India that can make a ten times better page. ADA should really think about putting together a PR-team and hiring a few programmers and such. There is´nt even a presentation of the aircraft on the page (at least not what I could find)…
No, in march 2003 the Indian Navy decided to fund the Tejas Naval, not the Mark-II news of which came out in 2008-2009 (i think).
There are some more direct quotes
“The LCA Mark 2 will have a bigger and more powerful engine, the fuselage will be changed, it will have bigger wings, and the aircraft will be more aerodynamic,” says Hindustan Aeronautics chairman Ashok Baweja, whose company manufactures the fighter. “There are upgrades down the line in every global fighter programme and that is the case with the Tejas as well.”
As for the Lack of Information and all, there is a huge lag, PR to the general public (as opposed to the specific client), is not a term well understood, one only learns with the times.
Although in recent times flow of information from such organisations has improved.
insomnia.delhiThere is a lot of talk about the LCA Mk2. Does anyone knows a link where one can read about all the updates and such. Preferable one with pictures how it will look and when they are planning the 1st flight and when did the Indian government give the go ahead for the project etc.
And not a link to some blogger or another fansite. I mean a link to an official site. I tried to search for the Tejas official site but was only directed to wikipedia.
It will look exactly the same as the current LSP versions, there are no pictures, the tender for the 99 engines with a option of 45 is underway.
If you want direct quotes all the information you will get is this.
ADA director, Dr PS Subramanyam.
What are the derivatives of LCA?
Seeing the performance of the Technology Demonstrators the Indian Navy and air force have now gained confidence in the aircraft – a confidence that they can move on to higher derivatives of the aircraft.
First, in March 2003, the Navy came forward with an order for a naval variant of the aircraft and decided to fund it.
Subsequently, the air force, realising that there was inadequacy of thrust in the aircraft, asked for a higher derivative of the aircraft with a new engine in the 90 tonnes class. This will be a Mark 2 version of the aircraft and will boast of new electronic warfare tools, reduced weight and improved performance.
The navy has also asked for a Mark 2 variant which will use a very small distance for take off and landing from an aircraft carrier.
http://www.domain-b.com/aero/20090206_lca_programme.html
Information flow about defence programs is slightly restricted and never updated on a month to month basis, as for the ADA’s Website
http://www.ada.gov.in/
insomnia.delhiSee, for the Home Air-Force the price is likely to be much cheaper. The discount of 1,500 million SEK is only over and above all this. You can try to find the export cost to say, Thailand, Hungary or the Czech republic. It will be much higher than $30 million.
A very strange statement, are you saying that SAAB will sell the planes at a loss, or perhaps that they charge more profits from foriegn buyers (that too in todays market)?
insomnia.delhiMy answer was´nt for you, it was for quadbike. Since he keeps thinking that the Gripen NG is just a paperplane like the LCA Mk2. I think it is a legit question why so many countries are even considering NG paperplane and not the Mk2. paperplane. They are after all, considered by most Indians, totally equal planes (if not the Mk2. is even better)…
Gripen NG is not a paper plane as the prototype exists and is undergoing testing/development.
http://www.gripen.com/en/MediaRelations/News/2008/Gripen_Demo_makes_its_maiden_flight.htm
If anyone doubts the news as Swedish propaganda, they could check out other news sources 😀
LCA tejas mark 2 is a paper plane as it is a on going project, till the engine is selected, and the Prototype is flying in the air it will remain a paperplane.
Somehow people take that as some sort of a insult, takes a long time developing a industry that can produce a plane to the specified requirement and comparing two nations which are so different (Sweden with the huge history of developing aircrafts), is not correct, infact the efforts of the Indian authorities are very similar to that of Sweden, to develop a defence industry so that the military equipment is largly indigenous (with differences also existing in certain other parameters).
Its strange that people wish to term a plane better, as if the planes will give a written examination to prove it.
I suppose as far as sales for Tejas go, one can never tell till they happen (or dont).
insomnia.delhiDo you really think India (or any other country) would even consider Gripen NG if they thought it was a paperplane?
If LCA Mk.2 is just like Gripen NG one has to wonder why that plane is not in any of the worlds races, not even its own countrys…
Dont go by the indian orders, they have to send the RFIs issue tenders and invite bids, the whole DPP problem, e.g: the Navy sent notices naval versions of eurofighter and gripen for carrier based aircrafts.
Are you serious, Indian Air Force is spending money on the planes development (the big tender for the engines)
insomnia.delhiOK, so say HAL wins an international order for 60 LCA MK2?
They dont even have production facilities set up to fufil that order, not evening worrying about teh fact they dont have a flying LCA MK2!!!!!
Yes, that is why there are no production facilities for the LCA Mark-2, there is no production variant to produce.
If and when there is a production variant they would set up a production line based on the estimated demand of the product, which will be from InAF
If there is some nation which wishes to buy 60 of the plane (with the InAF going for around 150 of the mark 2 planes) there orders will have to
– come out of the InAF’s production slots.
– wait for the line to be free.
– GoI/InAF/MoD will have to give HAL the money to open up a production line.
Its tough business earning profits in any industry, and especially so in high tech industries.
At the end of the day, the company has to make a profit or ask the GoI for a bailout.
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2009/04/04/stories/2009040451341100.htm
Bangalore, April 3 In a year that saw Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd close its 50-year-old airport to scheduled commercial flights, the defence public enterprise posted a 22 per cent higher pre-tax profit of Rs 2,260 crore year on year in the just-ended fiscal.
Sales turnover touched Rs 10,260 crore or a growth of 19 per cent year on year for fiscal 2008-09, a company release said on Wednesday.
Despite the economic slowdown globally, the order book was at an enviable figure of over Rs 60,000 crore. The 22 per cent higher PBT, it said, was an impressive figure compared to the performance of similar aerospace companies around the world.
“With an emphasis on developing indigenous capabilities, the company is taking up the design and development of the light utility helicopter in the 3-tonne category at a cost of Rs 446.08 crore. HAL has also concluded initial agreements with Russian companies to co-design and co-develop the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft and the Multi-Role Transport Aircraft,” the release said.
Export earnings at Rs 421 crore were the highest ever. The highlight of the year was Ecuador’s placing a purchase order for seven advanced light helicopters. Five of the aircraft were delivered in March.
The company’s value of production was up 27 per cent to Rs 11,161 crore (Rs 8,791 crore.) “With this performance, this premier defence navratna company meets all the MoU parameters and would achieve ‘Excellent’ rating under the Government’s performance evaluation of PSUs,” HAL said.
Sign In
