The Tejas Tweets 2 part 2.

This is what Mr. Indranil Roy wrote in his tweets. The paragraphs numbers and lighter font are his remarks and my reactions are in bold.

I am going to reply to this tweet. @bheemmz please don’t be offended. Nothing against you. Here “you/yours” refers to a 3rd person. This tweet just contains some often-repeated misconceptions which need to be clarified. My discussion today is going to be limited to fixed wings.

This tweet conflates design and manufacturing expertise and where these expertise lie within the Indian aerospace ecosystem. Also the idea that canards on fighter are some super-duper technology needs some debunking.

2. First, design & manufacturing expertise are completely different. Designing a complex system is difficult. But designing a system that can be built and operated with ease is more difficult. Indian aero-community is currently learning to overcome this second level of difficulty

 

2 is Good for a laugh. This is the first time I have heard that Design and Manufacturing are different but and I spent my career developing products in India. Here is an old poem- it was old when I read it fifty years ago as an UG. 

THE DESIGNER

The designer bent across his board,
Wonderful things in his head were stored,
And he said as he rubbed his throbbing bean,
"How can I make this thing hard to machine?
If this part here were only straight,
I'm sure the thing would work first rate.
But would be so easy to turn and bore,
It never would make the machinist sore.
I better put a a right angle there,
Then watch them babies tear their hair.
And I'll put the holes that hold the cap,
Way down here where they're hard to tap.
Now this piece won't work, I'll bet a buck,
For it can't be held in a shoe or chuck,
It can't be drilled or it can't be ground,
In fact, the design is exceedingly sound. He look again and cried, "At last!
Success is mine, it can't even be cast."

An engineer who is not looking at producibility -may be a "Scientist" but not an Engineer. - and I think that was the problem with the Tejas MK1 and possibly Mk1A though I do remember much hoo-hah from ADA eminences about concurrent engineering being followed. As with other promises this does not seem to have been realized.  - We must get out of the assumption that qualifications alone make for merit or suitability for the job.

3.Let me give you other examples. Russia and China know have viable 5th gen aircrafts. But when it comes to building and delivering 100s of F35s per year, the US is decades ahead of them. Europe, India, Japan, S. Korea and Turkey trail even China and Russia.

4.Another example would be Boeing, Embraer and Airbus when it comes to airliners. The Chinese COMAC, Japanese Mitsubishi and Russian Sukhoi are bridging that gap now. BAE, Antonov, Dornier and Ilyushin never managed to do so.

 

Examples are right but they relate to production capacity which is not the problem with the Tejas which is producibility. No study has been done as to why the facilities for sixteen per year cannot be used to produce forty per year. Usually a bit of line balancing will do the trick and we can have forty per year from the same facilities..  Production capacity has nothing to do with produce ability as by the poem above. I suspect that the poor rate of production of the Tejas is because the "Scientists" lacked the seasoned designer's instinct for producibility. Regarding Production capacity also you have not given any analysis. Here is mine.

The ability of a country to deliver high tech goods en masse for the world depends on the following factors- not given in the order of importance.

1.      1,Size of population

2.      1. The amount of political interference in Education

3.      2 . The level of empowerment given to the citizens to shape their own lives and to set up enterprises.

4.      3. The level of extraction of the profits from business by the politicians.

5.      4. The freedom to express and communicate views.

6.      5 The running of businesses by professionals and not generalists-related to 2 above.

6. My above points completely explains your above statements. Note that no “technology” is involved.

Sweden with the population of Patna cannot be a mass producers but like Israel is a remarkable niche player. Trained manpower is a crucial element. Even the US dominates Aerospace after conceding  Automobiles, White goods and Electronics to Japan and Korea. DC 9 airframes were made in China so that the US could concentrate its man power on making military airframes sold at $ 20,000/kg- at almost the price of gold-at prices circa 2019

Russia and China are hampered by 2,4,5. In the Soviet Union a famer's son could become a heart surgeon but the boy or girl's own wish was of little import. The party decided that. many people were disqualified for political in correctness. There is a risk Edison, had he been politically incorrect, would have spent his life cleaning out pigsties in the Soviet Union. The Bolsheviks were appalling wasters of Human Resources for " " ideological"  reasons.

In India in the past the Leftist Socialist kept us dis-empowerd by their socialist policies- or perhaps by treating import corruption as ATMs .Even today Defence Industry is the last refuge of the socialist bureaucrats. We suffer from everything except the first. And perhaps 4 though as we  saw people can lose their Government jobs for sticking up for their government firms. If we correct our lacunae we can be the superpower of aircraft development in the world but that requires reining the politicians which is ... difficult and getting the scientists out of "politics" which is probably easier though the most important are or- were- quite wily being competent "politicians " themselves. 

 

5.Let’s return to India & understand where these expertise lie in the Indian ecosystem. Around late 1970s/ early 1980s, India had struggled & failed to fit a good afterburning engine into the Marut. Numerous follow on fighter proposals from HAL were shot down.

There was no "struggle"-  outside a few "idealist" people of HAL; it was quite probably deliberate anti industry sabotage. We were offered three opportunities and we deliberately ignored all three of them. Who took these decisions? People on part time duty as minsters and babus who would be posted out;  people with zero industrial experience and gentlemen economists with Cambridge degrees. The systems were such they could not be held responsible. I am sure when Bristol Engines offered the B.Or.12 for GBP300,000 any private sector firm , say Tata or Walchandnagar Industries, (the founders of HAL), would have jumped at the opportunity to close the deal as we could then have exported the aircraft to the third world nations. Was the Marut affair a part of a conspiracy by a few to keep India dependent on imports? It would be interesting to find out how many Babus of the concerned Ministries of that time had their fairly mediocre children admitted  to Foreign Universities. If true They sold cheap. Strike 1.

6. At that time, it was (debatably) adjudged that HAL’s design bureau won’t be able to deliver India’s next fighter .

Who  " misjudged" ?Again the same sorry lot department with possibly an agenda to expand their .never mind national interests.  People with a direct Interest in DRDO and Empire building and a coterie with no Industrial experience and Babus on deputation to the MoD. One can say that the steady cancellations of various promising HAL proposals  through out the '70s was a part of the long term plan to closed down a going concern and foist an unproven entity which would be so designed as not to deliver.  No one can disprove or prove the charge but it is a definite possibility given Big Power interest in India as a Market.. Strike 2. 

Success in Nuclear and space domain also bolstered this reasoning.

In the case of Space Vikram Sarabhai, Nambi Narayan and APJ Abdul Kalam were "hands on ,value driven and had seasoned track record of  having produced successful hardware with little resources and they were "dyed in the wool" space people. Their CVs and the CVs of the ADA protagonists don't compare, the ADA protagonists  being almost totally bureaucratic or detail research rather than programme management though they had impressive degrees on paper .  Also Space is indeed "rocket Science" but Aircraft- involving human beings more persistently is more variable and changeling.

7.ADA was created and it was given the mandate to form the team that can design and build India’s next fighter. It recruited from everywhere, but it was no surprise that HAL’s fixed wing design team got gutted and absorbed.

If building the next jet fighter alone was the ONLY aim then why was the HAL Engine Design Bureau which had developed the HPE 90.HPE 260 and the HJE 2500 engines under TV Vareed closed down and GTRE with no manufacturing experience or facilities was anointed as the agency for developing the critical Kaveri Engine? To rephrase Ogilvy -Would yr. wife have allowed you to do that if it was her money? About this time the Aircraft Design Centre of DGCA at Safdarjung designing club trainers was closed down and trainer aircraft imported. 

Regarding t recruited from everywhere, but it was no surprise that HAL’s fixed wing design team got gutted and absorbed. What makes you think they recruited from everywhere ? Have you gone through the employment rosters of that time( 1983-1990) ? In the heady '80s it seems that it was going to be a family DRDO effort and the team was going to show 'em. Hard realization came after the mess was made. It was probably megalomania and empire building. Strike 3

8.This was a serious blow to HAL’s own fixed wing design capability. This would not be revived till IJT and HTT-40 efforts. As the rebuild continues today, there is some competition between ADA and HAL. They are part collaborators and part competitors today. 

There is no competition. Combat aircraft remains an ADA monopoly jealously guarded despite repeated failures. This part competitor, part collaborator is the worst of Industrial organization. It does not work. Was this done deliberately to cause delays in India's search for independence? Whatever their inadequacies in terms of engineering capabilities the- the DRDO/IISc/IAS caucus  were extremely astute individuals. Why did they do this?

9.Obviously, there are pros and cons of this situation. In my humble opinion, the time is fast approaching where a relook into this structure must be re-evaluated given today’s ground realities.

10.But as it stands today, ADA is far ahead of HAL in designing modern fighter aircrafts. The core of this strength lies in their control-law team. Make no mistake, that team is absolutely world-class. It is central to Tejas’s incidence-free testing and deployment.

You are compartmentalizing air craft design. If you have heard of Alexander Yakovlev you will remember that he not only designed the CCCP's best fighters but also its largest- at that time- Helicopter the Yak 24. I am not so sure that ADA is ahead of HAL in fighter design. Aircraft Design requires Wisdom which has been distilled from knowledge which is derived from Information. HAL is far better in the vital Knowledge /wisdom requirement than ADA which- isolated in its "Ivory Tower" structure- cannot, go beyond information though ADA has probably more qualified staff. Regarding the ADA control law team it may indeed be world class but a chain is as strong as its weakest link. Most of the collaborators of ADA- CSIO/CABS/L&T etc pass muster. It is in packaging ,layout and programme management- see wisdom above- that ADA Chief Designer ship has repeatedly blundered. The chain is repeatedly snapping there.

11. New modes that have  gone into Tejas like the Automatic Low Speed Recovery, Assisted take off and recovery (for NLCA) etc. are truly world-class. They learn and build on existing methods, and then refine on their bird. E.g. watch @JA_Maolankar sir’s lectures on NLCA.

12.Tejas's ALSR is fully automatic. Not only does it provide carefree handling, it can recover the aircraft when the pilot is incapacitated. Also it uses simpler maneuvers for recovery. These has been validated through many ground-simulation (by real pilots) & in-flight testing.

So? Are you impressing the natives with a Zippo lighter? The MiG 21 of sixty years ago had auto recovery – based on bulky mechanical systems like the AGD

13.And because it uses simpler maneuvers it can even be deployed on less aerobatic aircrafts like trainers and transports (with auto-pilots). So believing that ADA’s control team cannot modified Tejas with canards on their own is baseless. More on this later.

????

14.Now let’s come to manufacturing. ADA has next to no manufacturing capability. It is hostage to HAL for the same. This is not ideal in my humble opinion and as I have said earlier a re-look may not be a bad idea. But that is a discussion for another day

Did the oh-so powerful and wise establishers of ADA under DRDO do that deliberately. It cut the tendons of the project. Strike 4. If you have been wondering about the "strike x" s it is a term from baseball. Three strikes and you are- or should be- out.

15.Without doubt, HAL is the biggest aerospace manufacturing house in India. Being a public company and somewhat of a monopoly, HAL has a captive customer in IAF. On the other hand, it is burdened with the inefficiency of India decision making and procurement mechanisms.

16.When you are in the field, you know who can deliver a quality product on time. But your hands are tied with public tendering-L1 circus. HAL managers helplessly watch the competition catch up and go past while they are waiting for tenders to be finalized.

?????

17.And then you find that some unrealistic player coming up as L1. It is an art to work with this setup. I know I don’t have the patience, capability and capacity.

If HAL is expected to compete with the private sector, this aspect must be relooked.

Aerospacee is a fast changing game. Without wisdom one will be always out of place. Aerospace is not for part timers and Bureaucrats. Air India is a good example of the wastage, corruption and decline in Quality that happens. Leave aerospace to professionals using their own money and sit back and collect the taxes. 

18.Having said that, HAL is leagues ahead of anybody else in India with respect to systems integration. There is nothing in the private domain which can compete the the DARIN, Mig-27 UPG, LCA Mk1A project or the integration of various weapon systems on Su-30 and LCA.

Might I humbly point out that the IAF and the BRDs did play a very considerable  role in the implementation. Upgrades worked because professionals (HAL) were talking to professionals (IAF) and they didn't make excuses. On the other hand a change of missiles- twenty years after kick off- and there fore inevitable is seen as an imposition and an excuse. Again no technology- it is the attitude.

19.However, the speed at which the private sector has come up in manufacturing capability is truly heartening. What is even more heartening is their success in the free-market. In some other fields, there are becoming tier-1 providers.

20. In the aerospace industry, this is starting to happen with rockets and UAVs. I only wish that some private entity takes the next step with fixed wing aircrafts.

21.Fighter aircrafts are a tough nut to crack in the first step. But general aviation aircrafts are possible. Taneja’s and Mahindra’s foray into this field weren’t successful. But I hope that changes with Mesco.

Just because the ADA project has been badly bungled by part time players and amateurs does not mean that fighters are difficult . I am amused by yr. “first step” You ignore the aeronautical heritage of over forty years prior to the Tejas just as DRDO ignored the rich heritage of India's aerospace industry when they started off on their lumbering journey- trying ,I feel, to make it  a DRDO uber alles affair.. They did not pay the price ;The IAF did.

22.Tata probably can do it with experience gained from manufacturing large aero structures for PC-12, DO-228 and now the C-295. But will they bite the bullet? And if they don’t, Indian decision makers need to relook why it is not lucrative enough for even such a large player?

Aerospace requires 24/7/365 attention. Any Democracy cannot have the time and the expertise. Nothing will happen until the Government extracts its digit from Aerospace Industry’s micromanagement. This present arrangement is perfect a very small group of people at Raisina to hold back Indian progress and encourage imports.

23.At the end of this thread, let me re-iterate: Please don’t confuse design and manufacturing capability. LCA Mk1 and its variants show that India’s capability of the former, i.e. designing good fighter aircrafts.

Disagree about design and manufacturing. For the other It is too early to agree with yr. statements If ADA does not roll out the Mk1A on schedule in 2022/23 the Government must read the riot act to DRDO and ADA

http://23.At 

24.LCA Mk1A reflect India’s efforts to bridge the latter, i.e. a design that can be built and manufactured easily. LCA Mk2, TEDBF, AMCA will reflect whether we have truly acquired that second capability.

My take is this; Having run through the original funds ( 1983) and the FSED funds ( 1993) the Coterie placed an "order" for an aircraft which had barely flown ( 2001) to keep the ADA going. Though there were spurts where the production rate was 12 aircraft per year teh average production rate was about two aircraft per year which indicates a tacit understanding by DRDO that the aircraft was  not fit for series production. As of now the aircraft- 21 years after first flight has not cleared its air to air firing. There is little technology in Gun firing but there possibly  is a poverty of spirit  in ADA.

25.Finally, I come t debunking that unfounded worry: canards!!! Canards seem fancy to people because they are not common. But did France require foreign help going from Mirage-2000 to Mirage-4000. How about US, China, Russia? Then why would India?

The foreign collaboration is a ”strawman” No one said anything about foreign collaboration which in any case does not work. but I do not have to be an Aerodynamicist to see straightaway that the location of the canards on the Tejas is -development wise- the riskiest I have seen so far. If there is problems it will be difficult to cure. Good Luck to ADA! They will need all of it!

26. One needs understanding of the aerodynamics at play. But the LCA Mk1 is flying around with active slats and flaperons. Not a single problem with these control surfaces. How is it possible that to do it without understanding the aerodynamics.

 No one said that but if you take 43 years the results are not so valued. Unfortunately Scientists are not commercially oriented.

27. And NLCA? How is such an unstable aircraft taking off and landing on aircraft carriers with active LEVCONs. When an aircraft takes off (from a ski jump) or lands on an aircraft carrier going full-speed into the wind, it is through a lot of turbulence.

28. Yet Mao sir says the actual operations on the Vikramaditya was an anti-climax. How?

And how about the in-flight refueling?

29. By design, Tejas is aerodynamically highly unstable. Without the control-logic, if the nose bobs up by 1 cm (because of turbulence) then within a second the aircraft’s nose will be bobbing up & down by 32 cms. In another 0.5 seconds, the aircraft will become uncontrollable!

30.The control logic needs to stop this from happening. But to do this, it needs to be fully aware of the state of the aircraft using sensor-inputs located all over the aircraft. But the airflow over the aircraft is asymmetric.

31. One side of the aircraft is flying in the wake of the IFR probe, the fuel pipe and basket which is trailing behind a huge heavy tanker.

32.Of course it is not a trivial task. But ADA’s control-law team did it. They built the system. The test pilots flew it and gave their inputs. Refinements followed and very soon Tejas will be fully cleared for all IFR engagements.

33. So, saying that India cannot design, build, test-fly and certify Tejas Mk2 and TEDBF with canards reflects only a poor understanding of where Indian aerospace industry stands today

Impressing the natives and Straw man arguments. TEBDF is fine/better w.r.t. canard location but Mk2 is on thin ice. I repeat the Canards  because the IAF has no fat left to absorb delays in Mk2. T

 

Finally both Canada and Great Britain had fine vibrant aircraft industries until in the 1950s, particularly in Britain, civil servants took inexplicable decisions which destroyed the Industry for ever. The same with Canada and even in Australia. There are people who believe that it was done at the behest of a certain country who subsequently benefitted from massive orders. Foreign Powers are always out to destroy potential competitors and talent at all levels. Why are we so sure that somehow we are not in anybody’s sights? Had the ADA experiment succeeded there would be no complaints but we have not got satisfaction. The setting up of an new ill structured organization, the emasculation of existing capabilities, the continued condoning of abject failures to meet any deadlines is what a crafty knowledgeable enemy of Indian Aviation would do. The entire setting up of ADA a subject of a critical review and an "Abwehr" investigation.