What to read next

16 Comments

  1. 1

    Anonymous

    Issues… since we missed… the industrial revolution… completely… think through… and through… address this… aspect… once addressed… India moves forward… not… all fields… gets affected… leads to… zero governance…

    Reply
  2. 2

    Anonymous

    Great Analysis, however I disagree that such Military strategic programs be under the purview of "Political entity". Instead it should be lead by a General level Military entity. Indian politicians are not from scientific, industrial or management backgrounds, hence their poor oversight is what cause problems in implementation of such state projects.

    Reply
  3. 3

    sorry

    "There are even insinuations that this aircraft has been more of a success to the scientists in lab coats than to the war fighter in flight suits. True; this fine aircraft has been hostage to a series of systemic shortcomings"

    This kind of comment comes only from a mindset with zero exposure to Research and development process

    Research and development means shortcomings will be there, if there is none, then we are not doing R and D, regardless of what we are trying to develop. We must build on what we learned and not try to create or expect to create something new out of blue sky that too within a period of time.

    Indian government must fund R and D in colleges, not just in DRDO or HAL.

    Reply
  4. 4

    Anonymous

    After reading in between the lines of test Chief's "candid" review, we come to know that IAF, is no different than Army when it comes to corruption and kickbacks. Only difference is IAF is more suave in it's approach to con the nation than Army.
    The IAF never wanted this aircraft from the very beginning. The reason being indigenous jets don't yield any kickbacks for our top brass, babus and mantris. Tejas program is redux of Arjun tank.

    Reply
  5. 5

    Anonymous

    Couldn't agree with the article more especially the comments on the industry not being aware of how to operate and use millitary aircraft. As a former aircraft engineer in the services to working with HAL post retirement on several projects I have personal experience of the issues mentioned above. This creates problems in operationalising and smooth induction of aircraft into service.

    Reply
  6. 6

    Anonymous

    IAF and IA strategy… won't drink milk till… get choclate (phorien deals)… inbetween war happens… IAF & IA… has jawans & air warriors… as connon fodder…

    Reply
  7. 7

    Hrishikesh

    "Tejas is a wonderful flying machine". All the IAF pilots who have flown it say this. The issues outlined are the ones which the program is battling and that is why it is absolutely imperative to get it done. Last mile is absolutely the toughest one. Like everyone IAF has to go through a complete mindset change. Moreover there has to be project management expertise. I was spoke with someone closely associated with the test program last year and he echoed the same sentiments especially around building industrial base. We are not only building an aircraft but also the testing equipment and so on which was never built before.

    Reply
  8. 8

    rahul

    the tejas as we call it a leap toward indigenous avionics design…the progress in the technology was inhereted time and again which delayed d project .better late than never.. following the NTPC when the americans imposed restrictions, the engine proposed could not be brought in..anywaz d way ahead is developing metallurgy for us to design indgenous engines .which will prove our worth in aviation engg. funding of projects at colleges is a good idea but lets see what d diplomats have to say about this

    Reply
  9. 9

    Anonymous

    We only want to buy Phoren so that our babus, mantris, and armed forces personnel can go on Phoren trips.

    Reply
  10. 10

    Red Baron

    Tejas is definetly not a groundbreaking plane in any technological area.

    It is not going to break any records in speed, stealth, maneouvrability or operational capabilities.

    Instead, Tejas should be mostly viewed, and appreciated, as a very important step in the learning and development of native indian technological know how.

    Something that many other countries like USA, United Kingdom, France and Russia had to go through to achieve a higher level of sophistication.
    India is learning (and that is a good thing) how to design and produce from scratch highly complicated flying weapon platforms.

    It is a long and expensive process, but if China can do it, india also can.

    Reply
  11. 11

    Anonymous

    what i think that the problems are1-The political will for indigenisation of military technology i mean hal can deliver an helo dhruv in 4,5years and the same can not deliver an avg fighter in 29 yrs.2-The difficiency of technocrats in R N D field.If we talk about a particular state say up then their are more than 500 engg. Colleges and around a million of engineers passout every year those from reputed institutions get campus placement and remaining became the fodder for the coaching institutes in delhi or hayderabad.

    Reply
  12. 12

    captainjohann

    Brilliant account by a patriotic pilot. A must read fro all babus of Delhi

    Reply
  13. 13

    Anonymous

    Muthanna praises the ASR given by IAF as world class documenet comparing it to some US standards in 1994.

    But IAF could not anticipate the need for longer range BVR weighing significantly heavier with even more launch stress on wings than the one’s available in the eighties.

    This lack of foresight is also one of the reason for delays, and weight increase in Tejas which led to the kaveri engine’s thrust falling below the level required for Tejas ,

    because later wings needed to be significantly strengthened to carry long range heavy BVRs.

    As usual it is quite easy to pat IAF on the back and pounce on ADA for all the so called troubles on LCA.The original ASR which is posted in ADA site calls for top speed of mach 1.5 at tropopause and 17 deg STR, which Tejas has exceeded even in MK-1 version and even with partially opened flight envelope has been exceeded by mk-1 itself within the partially opened flight envelope.
    ersakthivel says:

    Reply
  14. 14

    Anonymous

    LCA had a radome dia almost equal to that of RAFALE, so that it can technically house the same diameter radar as RAFALE and fire the same METEOR missile as RAFALE does with almost the same RCS.
    What is surprising is so called critics almost seem to forget this critical fact ,the extra stengthening of the wings is a fact posted in an article by former SA to Pm like A.Partahsarahty and head of the procurement committee Raman Puri.And no one from IAF contested it till date.

    The original ASR of IAF says a weapon weight of 4 tons. Now mk-2 is about to carry 5 tons with almost the same empty weight and the same wing loading and RAFALE sized asea Radar which is a feat equal to that of Grippen NG.In fact the TWR of mk-2 will be lot closer to that of RAFALE.

    MK-1 itself has more TWR and lower wing loading than Mirage -2000 in IAF. Lower wing loading and more TWR means more maneuverable than Mirage .

    The reason Tejas was freed from the shackles of IAF and HAL was the disappointing failure of HAL-IAF combine to develop even a decent turbo prop till date or a trainer of international class.

    That led to the creation of ADA and now LCA mk-1 is comparable to the upgraded Mirage-2000 within it’s weapon load and range.
    The reason the funding was delayed was due to the economic crisis and intense wrangling by IAF and many sections of officialdom to scuttle the project. The two TDs first and LSPs later arrangement was due to the efforts of higher up to save the project.

    So once the funding was released the prototypes flew in seven years. What is the problem?
    It took “7 years “IAF and MOD combine to evaluate and select the MMRCA contenders.Still there is no clarity on contract and the deal in murky waters with shadowy allegations about bribes.

    SO folks must be rational in commenting. When some one says it is a fine flying machine. There is no way a fine flying machine comes out of a flawed design process.All fighters have niggling issues. Even SUKHOI has engine shaft failures and typhons of RAF limited to 80 percent of their top speeds due to uncontrollable vibrations and cracks on Hornets and flawed OBORGs on F_22.

    SO why the big fuss about LCA time line.

    Reply
  15. 15

    Anonymous

    http://www.hindu.com/2008/03/09/stories/2008030955051000.htm

    Ashok Parthasarathi was Science Adviser to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Vice- Admiral (retired) Raman Puri was Chief of Integrated Defence Staff to the Chairman, Committee of Service Chiefs, remaining closely involved with the inter-service weapons acquisition process from October 2003 to February 2006

    In the link above RAMAN PURI explicitly says that Tejas will remain at the cutting edge of the IAF even after the induction of MMRCA contender.He is the head of procurement who handled MMRCA tender.

    The fighter had a developmental time line almost equal to that of TYPHOON , even with delayed funding due to the financial wranglings and economic crisis of the 90s.

    till date test pilots have only praised it’s handling qualities stressing it is an ever upgradable fighter..

    Reply
  16. 16

    Elizabeth J. Neal

    There are even insinuations that this aircraft has been more of a success to the scientists in lab coats than to the war fighter in flight suits. True; this fine aircraft has been hostage to a series of systemic shortcomings. There are significant lessons here for the Indian aviation industry. It is vitally important that these lessons are imbibed in order to move forward coherently in building a strong aeronautics industry in this country. luxury travel

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © . All rights reserved.