IAF Scales Down FGFA Numbers By A Third: Report

[sancho]

If all true then why different numbers are coming out ???

Don't know about the numbers, since they are keep changing and changing, be it in the media, or even from the Air Marshal itself. I simply wait and see.

And I think the contribution we are going to make in the project is one time. So what ever investment needed for JV is going to be paid by GOI no matter you produce 10 or 100.

Of course it makes a difference, because when we "would be able" to develop a 5th gen fighter alone, we don't have to invest that much money in FGFA and simply could buy such a low number of fighters as a simple export customer, like we did with MKI. That money then, could have been invested in more important defence developments.

I highly doubt this figure, but as I said since he took office I see more chaos in IAF than a clear direction.

I disagree, its time DRDO looks outside its typical supplier chain..
Open the AMCA up to a consortium.. let companies like TATA put their money into it.. and invest.
They will develop the manufacturing base because they can afford to and they will be allowed to by the world.
You are underestimating the power of private venture here.. let the AMCA take those fruits and you will be surprised.
Its DRDO thats the lumbering bureaucratic setup.. the corporate setups are not.

I agree to DRDO, but disagree to the rest, because it has nothing to do with money, if you can develop most advanced techs or not. Look at China, except of the US nobody else is spending so much money and what did they achieved so far? Still having major problems in indigenous engine developments, still have no own design for their fighters and helicopters..., so even they need time to learn and further improve their capabilities, till they will be able to develop a similar capable engine as the AL 41 for example, or till they develop fighters with an own advanced design.
What is needed is a base of knowledge and experience, that's lacking in India at first place and that's why even privat companies like Tata won't be able to develop even a 4th gen fighter on their own today and would need foreign JV partners (take FICV for example, where the privat companies teamed up with foreign JVs partners). But that is the same that our goverment owned companies need as well. As long as they think they can do it alone, we will remain in this slow development pace. That's why AMCA needs foreign development partners from the start and not only privat partners or more money.

- get Snecma for the Kaveri co-development
- link the Rafale procurement with AMCA and get Dassault as a co-development partner
- get ELTA or Thales for the development of the AESA radar and NG avionics
- take as much minor parts from Rafale or LCA MK2, that will be produced in India, to increase commonality (gears, cockpit displays, HMS, IRST, EWS sensors and especially a similar weapon package
- offer Brazil to be a partner in the AMCA and IAC 2 development, to share costs and risks, as well as to benefit from their capabilities in the aviation industry

As you can see, there are numerous ways to improve and ease this development, by getting foreign partners and benefiting from already existing developments and procurements. I

On the contrary.. an indigenous weapons industry will free India from reliance and give it the opportunity to follow a completely independent policy..

But at what costs? India is currently over dependent on Russian arms, but they also provide us with the best arms in our arsenal. Indias defence industry is not even close to offer the same level of techs, so why should we justify with less capable weapons and techs, just to say we are not dependent on Russia anymore?
What India really needs is to improve the industry and balance the foreign procurements to various directions!
That means, form as much JVs or Co-developments for advanced tech with experienced partners, get as much indigenous stuff for the lower end as possible and add specialised foreign procurements from different countries at the side too:


=> Hi level - FGFA - co-development
=> mid level - MKI & Rafale - specialised foreign procurements from different countries
=> lo level - LCA - the best what Indian defence industry currently can offer

The result is, less dependance on Russia, because we co-developed FGFA, because we have other foreign alternatives to their fighters, without any reduction in capability and quality!

The Heavier types are also less flexible.. India's main forte should be based on medium sized fighters able to project power within a 500km radius of its borders with ease and quick deployment.
The MMRCA and AMCA are its main force strikers.

I disagree, a radius of 500Km would include most targets in Pakistan, but that is not where the important targets for India lies. Even MMRCA was bought with long range and deep strike capabilities in mind, which are defenitely not needed just to hit targets around the border area. To effectively defend against China, IAF needs to be capable to hit the enemy in a greater distance from our borders and bring the war to them, not at our land or airspace. Therefore, you need to be able to attack missiles sites, air bases, infrastructure in the rear as well, not only at the frontlines shortly behind the borders. FGFA and AURA UCAV will play a crucial role here and will be the most important additions to Indian defence in the next decade, at least for IAF. AMCA don't add anything these 2 wouldn't do better anyway, which is why we should develop it as a carrier fighter for IN in first place, similar to J31.

One thing where I envy the Chinese, they think rational and keep it simple, while in India too much is based on pride, be it in the developments or even between the forces.

 

[SQ8]

Basically, you are saying add more western a/c, instead, but the claim is by Indinas and i guess the backgroud could be that they do not need too many a/c, than why are you suggesting a compensation?


Till today, all world have tried to help Indians, including French, American, Europeans, Russinas but the have failed to come up with a design of their own.
Why you believe there will be a sudden change in technology absorption in India?
or perhaps you are teasing Indians with word 'indigenization'!

I am not suggesting a western aircraft at all.. the AMCA is Indian, perhaps you are confusing it with the MMCRA

And if the Indians had failed to come up with a design of their own, so have a lot of other countries.
But in as such, their amalgamation experiments(MKI, Dhruv, Tejas) have not been failures as programs at all.
Moreover, their private sector is bubbling with potential.. and this is where they are somehow failing to tap it as much as they actually can.

 

[Sergi]

@Sancho please answer to the post #44

 

[SQ8]

I agree to DRDO, but disagree to the rest, because it has nothing to do with money, if you can develop most advanced techs or not. Look at China, except of the US nobody else is spending so much money and what did they achieved so far? Still having major problems in indigenous engine developments, still have no own design for their fighters and helicopters..., so even they need time to learn and further improve their capabilities, till they will be able to develop a similar capable engine as the AL 41 for example, or till they develop fighters with an own advanced design.
What is needed is a base of knowledge and experience, that's lacking in India at first place and that's why even privat companies like Tata won't be able to develop even a 4th gen fighter on their own today and would need foreign JV partners (take FICV for example, where the privat companies teamed up with foreign JVs partners). But that is the same that our goverment owned companies need as well. As long as they think they can do it alone, we will remain in this slow development pace. That's why AMCA needs foreign development partners from the start and not only privat partners or more money.

- get Snecma for the Kaveri co-development
- link the Rafale procurement with AMCA and get Dassault as a co-development partner
- get ELTA or Thales for the development of the AESA radar and NG avionics
- take as much minor parts from Rafale or LCA MK2, that will be produced in India, to increase commonality (gears, cockpit displays, HMS, IRST, EWS sensors and especially a similar weapon package
- offer Brazil to be a partner in the AMCA and IAC 2 development, to share costs and risks, as well as to benefit from their capabilities in the aviation industry

As you can see, there are numerous ways to improve and ease this development, by getting foreign partners and benefiting from already existing developments and procurements. I




But at what costs? India is currently over dependent on Russian arms, but they also provide us with the best arms in our arsenal. Indias defence industry is not even close to offer the same level of techs, so why should we justify with less capable weapons and techs, just to say we are not dependent on Russia anymore?
What India really needs is to improve the industry and balance the foreign procurements to various directions!
That means, form as much JVs or Co-developments for advanced tech with experienced partners, get as much indigenous stuff for the lower end as possible and add specialised foreign procurements from different countries at the side too:


=> Hi level - FGFA - co-development
=> mid level - MKI & Rafale - specialised foreign procurements from different countries
=> lo level - LCA - the best what Indian defence industry currently can offer

The result is, less dependance on Russia, because we co-developed FGFA, because we have other foreign alternatives to their fighters, without any reduction in capability and quality!




I disagree, a radius of 500Km would include most targets in Pakistan, but that is not where the important targets for India lies. Even MMRCA was bought with long range and deep strike capabilities in mind, which are defenitely not needed just to hit targets around the border area. To effectively defend against China, IAF needs to be capable to hit the enemy in a greater distance from our borders and bring the war to them, not at our land or airspace. Therefore, you need to be able to attack missiles sites, air bases, infrastructure in the rear as well, not only at the frontlines shortly behind the borders. FGFA and AURA UCAV will play a crucial role here and will be the most important additions to Indian defence in the next decade, at least for IAF. AMCA don't add anything these 2 wouldn't do better anyway, which is why we should develop it as a carrier fighter for IN in first place, similar to J31.

One thing where I envy the Chinese, they think rational and keep it simple, while in India too much is based on pride, be it in the developments or even between the forces.

1.(and bear with me) Foreign partners are good, but they at best provide you with information and not knowledge.
There is a difference between the two.. information is distributable, can be gained easily and applied. Knowledge is inherent and cannot be transferred as easily.
Knowledge is needed to create information of your own, and at a certain stage ..even information needs knowledge for absorption.

The reason the Chinese have hit their stumbling block is because they have lots of information but very little knowledge. Their knowledge is excellent in knowing how to absorb information and use it , but where it comes to actually being able to generate their own information for consumption in terms of engine design and electronics... they struggle.

India has the advantage of a having an immense potential to create knowledge at this stage, JV's are an excellent source of it.. but unless that provides knowledge through creating a base for it.. via research both within government sectors and private ones.. it is still information that does not allow independence.

The Agni series have moved on from information to knowledge, BEL, TATA and the likes represent knowledge centers. However, HAL's JV on the Rafale does not.. it represents information.. gained easily but does not provide independence and does not provide the ability to leap ahead.
The AMCA is a chance to develop knowledge(already at a certain stage with the Tejas), and that opportunity should not be missed.


2. By 500km I represented the most frequent threats India has.. the MMRCA is already capable of going furhter.. but that 500km figure represents the figure that in my view India needs to keep "secure" to ensure that it is not effected at all internally.

As for the carrier force requirement, it can be met with the AMCA as well...
It will be India's own fighter in as such that unlike the Tejas there will be building blocks to start with. What will be needed are ways to ditch the shackles of India's bureaucracy ..and that is what the many Private ventures within India provide. They can be cut throat and efficient in their tasks without having a bureaucratic system monitoring their every internal move.

 

[arp2041]

Oscar & Sancho's friendly fight in this thread, i remembered one movie poster:

 

[isro2222]

The reason must be the 'Money'.... Not saying india dont have money to spend.... But india now knows how russia works.... India gave 6 billion dollars already for development of FGFA.... But trust me thats just a 'TOKEN'.... Russia will make india pay huge amount of money.... India knew it.... So india already reduced the number of FGFA.... Good Move....

 

[sancho]

Likewise, LCA has very much adv radar absorbing material , coating and very small can also confuse the enemy radar by giving bunch of bird signature.

those people working is preparing the ground work for the indian stealth, radar , material , engine and everything will go on indian next plane will be ready in very less time.

You are right of course that RAM coatings are important, but the biggest difference between an LCA and a stealth fighter is the design change to reflect radar waves and carry payloads internally only!
You can add as mach RAM coatings and materials you want to an LCA, the minute it adds a fuel tank or weapons, the RCS will dramatically increase again, which means the outcome is very limited only. But take a much bigger FGFA without any coatings, only with it's shapings and the internal carriage of fuel and weapons and you have a way lower RCS.
That's why the most important way to reduce the RCS at 4th gen fighters, is to reduce it's external payloads, see the F15 Silent Eagle, or the F18 Silent Hornet (CFTs + internal weapon bays).

Knowledge is inherent and cannot be transferred as easily.
Knowledge is needed to create information of your own, and at a certain stage ..even information needs knowledge for absorption.

Exactly and that's where DRDO for example messed up Kaveri development, too little knowledge too much overconfidence. If they had worked with an foreign partner, like they want to do NOW as well, Kaveri would have been a success now!

The reason the Chinese have hit their stumbling block is because they have lots of information but very little knowledge. Their knowledge is excellent in knowing how to absorb information and use it , but where it comes to actually being able to generate their own information for consumption in terms of engine design and electronics... they struggle.

Totally agree with that either, which again confirms, that investing money alone is not all, but they have a very impressing pace on how to absorb knowledge and to further improve themself, so there should be no doubt about that they will be equal to the west sooner or later, the question is just when?

The Agni series have moved on from information to knowledge, BEL, TATA and the likes represent knowledge centers. However, HAL's JV on the Rafale does not.. it represents information.. gained easily but does not provide independence and does not provide the ability to leap ahead.

You are comparing different things here, because there was no alternative to develop our own knowledge in the missile or nuclear field, since only a very few countries would share that kind of infos.
MMRCA on the other side is meant to be a boost for our industry, because LCA has proved that we wasn't able to develop 4th gen techs alone (Kaveri, MMR), that's where Rafale will bring in the necessary knowledge to improve our self by improving our industies with 4.5 gen techs (AESA radars, modern avionics, cristal blade engine techs), even the knowledge in design will benefit us. When you look at LCA, Saras, or IJT, you will see that they all struggle from design flaws, which means the basics itself needs to be improved, how should HAL, ADA, DRDO then design a 5th gen fighter when they can't even do it at such a way simpler level?

The AMCA is a chance to develop knowledge(already at a certain stage with the Tejas), and that opportunity should not be missed.

No doubt, but only because one wants to gainknowledge, you don't need to have a full development including an order of 200 fighters. That's what tech demonstrator programms are for!
Also why I want N-LCA tech demo prototypes, but not as an operational fighter, because it is important for our industry to gain know how in designing a carrier fighter, but it is not important for IN to use a limited capable fighter.
Similarly, it is important for Indian industry to get knowledge of NG fighter designs (FGFA) and NG techs (MMRCA & FGFA), but not to add another type of fighter to the IAF fleet.

LCA, FGFA and AURA UCAV for IAF!
AMCA for IN!
N-LCA tech demo for our Industry!

Oscar & Sancho's friendly fight in this thread

It's not a fight at all, it's just way to share thoughts and different point of views and the good thing is, we don't need to agree with each on everything to respect each other!

 

[arp2041]

It's not a fight at all, it's just way to share thoughts and different point of views and the good thing is, we don't need to agree with each on everything to respect each other!

That's why I said "friendly fight". It is b'coz of people like u sancho or oscar that this remains a defence forum & many people (including me) get tech. knowledge of things which they din't knew earlier

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

Aren't you doing exactly the same thing ???
Stealth is VLO or LO on Radar. It isn't invisible to radar. It's the distance vs RSC which is matter.

I will say you are expecting a lot form LCA.
I suggest you post this in LCA stick thread. And SANCHO will be the ideal man to discuss with.
And try avoid ranting . That spoil the discussion. Good luck

I am not expecting much from LCA , what i am saying the technology gained from LCA can and will be used in next gen indian stealth fighter.

 

[Sergi]

I am not expecting much from LCA , what i am saying the technology gained from LCA can and will be used in next gen indian stealth fighter.

And that's correct too. Technology and experience gained never goes in vain
I hope you read post #52. Sancho has answered your query.

 

[sancho]

I am not expecting much from LCA , what i am saying the technology gained from LCA can and will be used in next gen indian stealth fighter.

The problem is, that there is waaaay too less that we gained from LCA development so far. Composites and coatings yes, but otherwise? Radar and engined developments failed, EW systems? Data links, com systems or Indian weapons, still under development.
In all these areas only FGFA and MMRCA will give us the needed knowledge to to develop AMCA.

 

[Ticker]

The problem is, that there is waaaay too less that we gained from LCA development so far. Composites and coatings yes, but otherwise? Radar and engined developments failed, EW systems? Data links, com systems or Indian weapons, still under development.
In all these areas only FGFA and MMRCA will give us the needed knowledge to to develop AMCA.

Does it mean that LCA may just remain a technology demonstrator and some may be produced to satisfy the ego, like Arjuns.

 

[JayAtl]

Does it mean that LCA may just remain a technology demonstrator and some may be produced to satisfy the ego, like Arjuns.

military and defense discussions are not your forte is it? do you actually think comments like above lend to making you look smarter or just dumber? honestly...

 

[Ticker]

military and defense discussions are not your forte is it? do you actually think comments like above lend to making you look smarter or just dumber? honestly...

aha .... what kind of military and military strategy related discussion do you want to have.

Name it ....... Any time.

 

[sancho]

Does it mean that LCA may just remain a technology demonstrator and some may be produced to satisfy the ego, like Arjuns.

Not at all, because the fighter itself still has very good potential, it's only some side development that failed and that should never had been combined with the LCA development at all.