AbhimanyuThere has been a lot of “heart-break” amongst Pakistani enthusiasts over why the JF-17 was restricted to only static displays at Farnborough.
In my view, the reason could be that JF-17 does not have any kind of flight certification. The Farnborough authorities did not want to take any kind of risk given the number of spectators on the ground. So, they allowed only static displays but no flying displays.
AbhimanyuIt is inaccurate to state that Tejas’ alpha is “restricted” to 25 degrees and hence its air intakes are faulty.
For a given angle of attack, a delta-wing fighter jet can turn much more rapidly than a conventional fighter like F-16 or MiG-29. Therefore, to achieve the same turn rate X, a delta wing will require far less alpha than a conventional fighter.
A Tejas or Mirage-2000 pilot cannot even dream of achieving 50 degree alpha ! The plane will tear apart ! So the talk of Tejas’ air-intake being faulty is based on groundless assumptions.
AbhimanyuJust one thing Abhi Persian derived words are used many times and its a reflection of our diverse culture MiG 27 is called Bahadur for example.
quadbike, MiG-27 is not indigenous.
The worst point is that Hindustan-Fighter X is very close to Fighter-China 1. At least can’t there be a differentiator on this count ?
AbhimanyuI’m not in favour of the Tejas getting an H-XX designation.
1) Unlike HF-24 Marut, this time HAL is NOT the lead designer (though even Marut was actually designed by Kurt Tank). The lead designer is ADA, while HAL is simply the manufacturer.
2) The official (and supposedly final) christening of the Tejas was already done by former PM AB Vajpayee. The alphanumeric LCA KH-2001 was done away with, though prototypes continued to be named in honour of Kota Harinarayana. So why should alphanumeric HF-XX be re-introduced ?
3) “Hindustan” is an Urdu/Persian word. I have nothing against it per se, as it denotes India as “Land of Hindus”. But since our indigenous weapons hardware is denoted in Sanskrit, the practice must remain.
4) None of our other hardware like Arjun, Agni, Dhruv, Arihant, Nag, Akash are alphanumeric. Why then go alphanumeric for this ?
5) The HF-XX designation is “jinxed” or “cursed”. We all know what happened to Marut. The HF-24 Marut, that is.
6) There must be some semblance of a difference between us and Pakistan-China. Lets not join the league of Fighter China – 1 (eerily similar to Hindustan Fighter – X).
Abhimanyu+1
$ 1 billion for 6 C130J
$ 5.8 billion for 10 C17s
$ 10 billion for MRCAThats $17+ billion over the next couple of years.
How much more for another foreign aircraft for the Navy?
Meanwhile Indian efforts are derided and underfunded by the armed forces (both personnel and R&D budgets).
Hi Shalav. It is good to know that you’re present on this forum also.
The paradigm of paisa pheko, maal kharido is followed even by Saudi Arabia which is lolling in its Typhoons, F-15Es, Patriots and what not. So, whats the great excitement if India too purchases the same, I can’t understand.
The real worry as you said rightly, is that all this is likely to stymie any indigenous development left. MRCA will definitely stem Tejas Mk-2 orders (I don’t agree with the there-is-place-for-both argument). And if the IAF finally signs on the dotted line to purchase the PAK-FA, it will surely affect the AMCA without doubt.
People used to say that MRCA is our last import. Then they said, “ok look PAK-FA is our final import. Promise. And by the way, its a 50-50 JV ! See !” Then when it became clear the JV is not even 95-5, then they said defiantly, “You know what, 5th gen. fighters aren’t going to last long. We will go 100% indigenous starting from UCAVs. We swear.”
I bet in 2017, we’ll hear an announcement of a mega global tender for 4 squadrons of UCAVs, sent out to France, Russia, Israel, European consortium, and USA.
Where the ***removed by moderator*** are the jholawala’s protesting all this profligate spending on “phoren maal”?
You won’t hear Rajat Pandit of Times of India, or Manu Pubby of Indian Express, ever questioning the voracious import appetite of the armed forces.
These two reporters have taken to reporting against DRDO and pro-imports with almost a war footing.
They do this in the name of “investigative journalism” and for the “benefit of our brave soldiers”. But the reality is that Boeing is an advertiser in these papers. Besides, American (and even Russian, French and Israeli) firms do not want another Bofors-like scam to leak out to the public and scuttle their future chances. So, they’ve bought out these two newspapers and their articles have to criticize the DRDO and report positively about Lockheed’s latest offer.
AbhimanyuNew mantra of Indian Armed Forces :- Have money, will splurge.
Even if it is JSF.
Even if it is Paper-Tiger Sea Gripen. We will even fund Sea Gripen’s development if SAAB wants us to.
AbhimanyuHere you go.
Please see the date on the above report : Nov 9, 2008. And that too it is a PTI report, and not by Shri. Rajat Pandit. Also, as pointed out earlier, not all of their online reports make it to the print version.
When many newspapers like DNA, The Hindu, Business Standard and Aviation Week are reporting about the Naval Tejas, and Dr. PS Subramanyam’s interview and Barbora’s sound-bytes, the silence of “India’s largest daily” is deafening.
AbhimanyuIndia establishing Shore Based Test Facility for testing Naval Tejas variant
The above is very good news for he Tejas programme. Once again, note that Times of India and Indian Express have absolutely no mention of this news.
For newspapers which moan about the “delays” in the Tejas programme and which show a lot of “concern” about our armed forces’ preparedness, the silence in this (as well as many other past progresses) is questionable.
AbhimanyuWell the sheer size of the Akash deal itself is more than good enough to understand how the Armed forces estimates this SAM, let us not try to take away the credit from the DRDO. And it is DRDO not DRDPO or DRDMO(P- production, M- manufacturing).
JimmyJ, I fully agree with the above. Especially the last part, which must be told to Shri. Rajat Pandit of ToI.
AbhimanyuAs per recent news report, after spending a short time at Sulur, the Tejas units would be transferred to the new Air Base at Phalodi, Rajasthan (which is near the border with Pak). Phalodi will also host the new Jaguar squadron. The logic of Phalodi-via-Sulur given was that, Sulur is close to Bangalore, where any last minute changes could be resolved quickly.
What happened to that ?
AbhimanyuYou would notice that Mercedes and Ducati are private companies.
And so are Tata motors and L&T (both of which have been around since pre-independence days). Tata still imports gear-boxes from Bosch after all these years.
So technological maturity has nothing to do with public or private companies. Private companies are simply more efficient at production and cost pruning. In R&D, there is no correlation.
And please go figure : BAe, Mikoyan, Sukhoi and Chengdu of China are all state-owned companies.
Leaving aside Nasa which is an unique case..let us compare whether govt organizations or private organizations have made the great discoveries of the world. Did a govt organization make electricty,or the computer,or windows etc etc.
Govt organizations by nature cannot compete with the private industry.
The first computer operating systems were made at universities, and internet, e-mail etc. were developed by US state-owned DARPA. Please update yourself on history.
Private companies only commoditized and commercialized these inventions / developments for mass consumption and profit.
I agree with Misraji , it has to be in phase wise , even if whole techincal details of Tejas or even IJT is given to Mahindra Aerospace or Godrej Aerospace it will take them years to put them under production , But people like me who have worked in Auto Industries (Tata Motors) know how much of Engine components or gear box or transmission TATA really manufactures or all the Advance engine of Mahindra Scorpio (M-Hawk series or CRDIe) comes from . some time i feel they are more of assembler and manufacturers then Developers .
Please tell this to Shri. matt and Shri. Samsara, who think that private companies are the panacea to all ills of defence production and development. Never mind the many goof-ups of the IAF and IA over the years.
AbhimanyuSukhoi head Mikhail Pogosyan had said that an additional agreement would be signed specifying the Indian role in the project, but on Friday he said that the Russian company hoped work would begin soon without any such deal.
Earlier, HAL was reported to be seeking a 25% share in design and development in the project.
It seems even Sukhoi is fed up of negotiating the so-called “work share” with HAL, because no amount pushing is going to bring to as high as the targeted 25%. Its more like 0.25% now.
The engine, radar, weapons, avionics and stealth technologies are all Russian. What can HAL bring to the table (and that too so late in the program’s commencement) ? Sukhoi even plans to make a trainer, which all know can eventually be modified for the twin-seater. So, HAL’s “help” is not needed even in the much-bargained for twin-seater.
“We will do our part of the work, our Indian counterparts theirs,” Pogosyan said. “At the initial stage it is not necessary to have a joint venture.”
Only time will tell what “25% work” HAL will do on the PAK-FA (or FGFA or whatever).
The important thing is that HAL is primarily a licence-producer of aircraft and parts. Even Tejas is not its own creation, and the most advanced jet it has made so far, is the IJT Sitara. In the light of this, what “25% work” can it possibly do on a 5th gen fighter ??
You could use the same argument against ADA and DRDO. Let DRDO and ADA show they are good at making aircraft and engines that are world class not just replacements for Mig-21 but that can be compared to F-15E’s, F-22’s Su-27s or even Mig-29, F-16, Gripen or Super Hornet.
See, Tejas compares very favourably to Gripen, and the Mk.2 version will definitely provide competition to the NG and even the F-16.
The AMCA shall also be a next gen. fighter in the class of F-35 atleast.
Let them build a jet engine that works, let them build anti air missiles without going to israel for seeker technology. let them build a world class tank that actually works with the current Indian Army Logistic instead of one that requires the Indian army to change all its methods of transport etc. Let them build an radar..
Akash is doing pretty well, what with 1000+ orders from IAF and IA. Akash Mk.2 has already begun development. Since seeker tech. is possessed only by 3-4 nations, you cannot unrealistically expect DRDO to automagically start making seekers right now. And the Indian Army itself asked for an Abrams-like Arjun. So they’d better change the British-era tracks. Besides, who told you that T-90s have had a spectacular run in India ? (electronics overheating, barrel bursting that killed 3 soldiers…the list is long).
AbhimanyuThis should be read by every self-righteous newbie who thinks privatization is a cure-all.
Thanks for the articles, Kramer~Ashish
I fully agree with the above. Itna hi craze hai, why don’t the pro-privatization people first ask Bajaj to compete with Ducati and Tata Motors to compete with Mercedes first ? Or ask L&T to make supercritical boilers or 1000 MW reactors, and compete with Areva ?
Is it asking for too much ? After all these are the fields that the aforementioned companies have a traditional foothold in.
But no, all the pro-privatization guys want is to shut down ADA / DRDO and hand over fighter jet design to Tata and L&T. As though making a fighter jet would be easier than making a Merc.
AbhimanyuIs it beyond the levels of possibility that SAAB designed an aircraft with a superior aero than ADA?
The publicly available specs do not suggest that at all. Now, I mayl pose a counter question : Isn’t it possible that the IAF is just lackadaisical in supporting Tejas, while having a “fetish” for imported weaponry ?
What does not work out , if we accept it is down to a creep in requirements alone and not a combination of issues with the manufacturing process of the structure or the selection of Composites with low specific strength and scope creep, is that if the weight has been increased to account for the increase in scope of the Tejas and weapons the LCA was supposed to carry then the structure would have had to be beefed up to make sure the Tejas could still do 9g.
However the weight has gone up and the g limit is 6.5g some people have in the past pointed out that this is due to the engines not being able to provide enough excess thrust but that is not as plausible.
The above is inaccurate. As mentioned earlier, in the December 2009 trials held at Goa, Tejas reached all IoC specs required of the flight envelop. This implies 8g, although news reports did not mention the specific numbers (even the 6.5g number came earlier from private chats with pilots at Aero-India and was published in only 1 little-known paper). And besides, the requirement is for 8g and not 9g, as per an interview of former DRDO chief, Dr. Natarajan.
The max. speed is between 1.6-1.7 Mach. The new engine will allow greater payload i.e. above 3.5 tons, and superior flight performance at lower altitudes. For the latter capability, Kaveri was needed as it is flat-rated. But now foreign engines are being called for, as it falls somewhat short of the required thrust.
AbhimanyuOriginal ASR of IAF wanted LCA to be 6 ton aircraft while ADA wanted to keep it around 5500kg but change in ASR by 2004 and also in wing design to carry heavy Weapons load , meant that weight went up to around 6500 same as a Gripen C ,
The above is accurate.
matt, you seem to have little idea about IAF’s bungling in the Tejas. It is true that Tejas was originally meant to be in the 5.5-6 ton category. But you see, 1987 is not the same as 2005. And hence, even the requirements are not the same.
During the 1990s, IAF demanded many additions to the Tejas that were impossible to have been accommodated within this weight limit. Avionics additions, performance specs that demanded airframe changes, etc. Thus, Tejas’ weight was bound to increase.
And yet, this does not mean that Tejas is “overweight”. I can challenge you to name any fighter jet, that has 8 hardpoints to carry 3.5 tons of weapons, quad-digital FBW, and nearly all avionics of Su-30 MKI —- and which weighs only 5.5 tons.
For your information, Gripen C weighs 6.5 tons, and it has exactly the same specs as Tejas Mk.1. JF-17 too weighs the same (and it has somewhat inferior specs than Tejas). Even S. Korean T-50 trainer weighs 6.4 tons, and it is way inferior to Tejas, which weighs only 100 kgs more.
What’s more, the trinity of Gripen-C/D, T-50 and Tejas Mk.1 are all powered by the good old GE-F404. So how can one say that Tejas is “overweight” ?
Sign In
