Why dont just scrap the program and build N-AMCA ? Those are twin engine and China has also built their Naval variant of J 31. Isn't it redundant ?
Because of one big issue: Mig-29K. This is what was/is pushing the rafale-M and SH requirement (along with 2nd carrier need dawning) .
They (Migs) are not faring well in operational readiness (and this can hold up or compromise desired schedule/operation of the air craft carrier as a whole at times)...nowhere near what was projected/promised anyway.
This is long story that basically stems from what the original Mig-29s were designed for (and ad-hoc converted to navalised design in the 90s after USSR collapse).
Skipping to N-AMCA would not solve this crucial window that Mig -29 sortie rate ("Attrition" on its effective availability) will soon open up given time to develop such platform like that...unless they go say for foreign import and soon.
But they want to try use/scale the LCA developed technology as much as they can for this....since the original scale of production run for just strict Mig-21 replacement by way of one mass produced variant (many 100's) will not happen...so there is goal to spread laterally to achieve the economy of scale for the current ecosystem generation in the interim anyway...and the argument is it can be done expediently too given you don't have to reinvent the wheel on lot of things like say with starting a program from zero.
I don’t get how they plan on managing so many programs. Tejas mark 1, mark 2, Orca, Tedbf, amca.
Let us treat mark 1 and mark1A as one category.....and mark 2 and tedbf as another category.
Skip ORCA, I think thats just going to be subsumed by the 2nd category now.
AMCA is 3rd category but generation higher and still needs lot of development, so lets ignore that for the immediate production planning.
So lets argue effectively two variant streams for purposes of this production analysis.
(Mark 1/A) and (Mark 2/TEDBF)
It will definitely be quite difficult (especially considering Indian defence industry problems with project mgmt. and production lines in PSU's to begin with).
But putting that aside (for sake of argument to get into it further), they will have to map out and organise (time wise and then cost wise) all the critical components, regular components, testing + cert schedules for these, and the larger different jig assemblies for both (and other things that will vary).
Some of this can overlap and double dip etc...others will be fully segregated (w.r.t capacity, resources and time use)...they will need to map out, organise, rationalise and discipline the work flow for all of this.
Some good news is lot of suppliers are outside of HAL, so I would imagine they (defence MSME etc) already know how and what they need to do/invest to scale production quickly once the numbers + overall HAL production line demand are confirmed. i.e lets simplify that they just need the commitment +funds to do their end.
But I think HAL would definitely have to acquire at least twice or maybe 3 times the jig assembly spaces, tooling and requisite capital machinery needed for that along with commensurate workforce hiring and training...given what I have seen in aerospace production runs (early on ramping) w.r.t critical backlog pressures (so you have enough spread laterally to do other stuff while those teeth out). Maybe about twice the number of testing capacity too.
All of these have to be modelled w.r.t the most critical time sensitive elements in each system...and also run a discrete math pathway modelling (essentially an optimised algorithm) to stress test this (beforehand) to find both optimal and also the highest sensitivitities in the process flow (and put extra redundancy+capacity in those places).
I'm unsure how the handoff formalities are done w.r.t IAF if there is any potential for further gumming up there.
This is why we need to get past HAL ASAP as the only assembler for these aircraft projects.
A Large private conglomerate (or better yet 2 set to compete with each other) will simply hire consultants (and project management specialists) as required to do this fast (and keep on retainer for any mid course correction issues that arise).
That stands in stark contrast to a PSU engineer (like my dad saw firsthand) having to always wonder which PSU
"we get paid more if we use up more time" babu toes are going to be trod upon by pushing boldly for rationalised streamlining and optimisation.
Maybe HAL has gotten better now (some fresh blood and pragmatic dynamism etc), I guess fingers crossed and lets see?
If same ole same ole instead, then its something like getting a sedentary couch potato to go run a marathon all of a sudden....that artery clogging is not gonna be good.
Natasha is generally forlorn from all of this these days, but Faye or Amy will be quick to work their proven charms to fill in the inability of India to ramp things its put in time and effort for...as always because of that PSU assembly addiction.
Part of me definitely wants to see some notable S-400 based sanctions from Amy arrive...it puts that much more whipping pressure (like china border tensions kind of did) to get this all more ship-shape...and there is promising economy of scale already offered on the table from Faye if we have to choose that instead...and skip to AMCA straight (hopefully with private companies introduced into assembling for both of these routes).
i.e with Amy out of picture (due to grampa Biden fake drama with Natasha), it gives less scope for babus to dither and waste time hmm-hawwing and paper recycling (of the most disturbing useless kind) as usual (the scope will still be there, it will just be less). I'm all for that as silver lining (for what will befall other things I thought looked promising).
But let's see.
@Vergennes @Kartal1 @Madokafc @#comcom @Milspec @anmdt @Sinan @Cabatli_53 @Webslave @T-123456 @Gautam @Milspec @Test7 @Saithan et al.
www.google.com
