What's new

IDN TAKE: But For Indian Babudom We Would Have Been A Major Fighter Aircraft Producer Country In The

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,470
Reaction score
87
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
LCA_Tejas_IDN_3.jpg


by Brig Arun Bajpai


Today we are celebrating induction of two indigenous Tejas LCA fighter aircrafts into Indian Air force on 01 Jul 2016.thanks to our babudom and lack of coordination, this LCA which was conceived in 1983 has taken 33 years to actually get inducted into IAF, a fourth generation fighter when most of the advanced countries are flying fifth generation fighters. Total budget allotment for this LCA fighter was 500 corers but it has taken 25000 corers to be called a fighter. Even now this fighter has only cleared initial operational clearance which means it can be employed only for limited operations that also in emergency.

Final operations clearance, meaning it meets all the parameters laid down, is expected in late 2016 or early 2017.Even otherwise it has only 35% indigenous inputs rest all are imported.Initailly IAF was not prepared to accept this fighter. However after persuasion from Indian defence minister Manohar Parrikar now IAF has agreed to induct initial 20 of the current model and next 80 of advanced model known as Tejas Mk1A.Meanwhile Hindustan Aeronautics ltd who are producing this fighter will have to ramp up their production line to produce 16 such fighters per year. This is a tall order for HAL, a public sector defence behemoth which lacks efficiency and necessary coordination.

HF_24_Marut_IDN.jpg


It is so sad that way back in mid 1950, India selected the great German aircraft designer Kurt Tank who had produced the famous Focke-Wolf-190 fighter aircraft for Hitler in Second World War. He was to produce a fighter aircraft for IAF indigenously. In keeping with his reputation Kurt tank and his team produced an excellent fighter by the name HF-24 Marut which was 70% indigenous. This fighter at that time was even better then best fighter of that day The British Hunter. HF-24 Marut was unbeatable in low level combat. However it lacked manoeuvrability because the British Orpheus 703 engine was not giving it sufficient power. Soviet Klimov-7 and RD-9F engines were also tired but did not fit in. This fighter was inducted in IAF in the same Dagger Squadron in which now Tejas have been inducted on 1 April 1967. Three such squadrons were created. HF-24 Marut took part in 1971 Indo-Pak war in Rajasthan sector. It flew 300 combat sorties. It suffered no damage from the enemy and enemy could not shoot down a single aircraft. Air Commodore Jasjit Singh writes that this HF-24 fighter was a fighter which was much ahead of its time and had we persisted with its development programme India would have been a generation ahead in fighter air craft production. However, the babus sitting in Ministry of defence said that this whole project is too costly and so decision was taken to scuttle the development program and the fighter was decommissioned. This goes to show how we lack long term planning and coordination. If PM Modi really wants Make in India in defence to succeed then he will have to totally revamp the functioning of MOD.babus must be thrown out from decion making loop. He must implement CDS system who should be made responsible and accountable for all these miss management, cost overruns and what have you. Need of the hour is cooperation, coordination and proper project management.

Brig Arun Bajpai is a distinguished Defence and Strategic Analyst. Views express are his own.

Admin - IDN

http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/07/idn-take-but-for-indian-babudom-we.html?m=1
 
. .
Even otherwise it has only 35% indigenous inputs rest all are imported.

I would love to see our Indian friends negate Brig (retd) Arun Bajpai on this claim.

Today we are celebrating induction of two indigenous Tejas LCA fighter aircrafts into Indian Air force on 01 Jul 2016.thanks to our babudom and lack of coordination, this LCA which was conceived in 1983 has taken 33 years to actually get inducted into IAF, a fourth generation fighter when most of the advanced countries are flying fifth generation fighters.

Is he referring to Mk1 as 4th Gen aircraft of futuristic MK1A variant as the one? Can anyone plz post the official definition that decides which Gen an aircraft is actually? If I take this as definition of 4th Gen aircraft then its so generalized that most of the aircraft fit in it.

"Fourth generation jet fighters (1970 to late 1980s)

The trend of improvement in avionics such as head-up displays and optimized aerodynamic design continued with the development of ‘fly by wire’ fighters such as the MiG-29 FULCRUM, Su-27 FLANKER, F/A-18 HORNET, F-15 EAGLE, F-16 FIGHTING FALCON, and DASSAULT Mirage-2000. Most of this generation of fighters had the ability to switch roles between air-to-air and air-to-ground seamlessly, as opposed to the previous role-dedicated aircraft. This in turn provided the pilot the ability to perform strike missions as well as control of the air"
.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-differences-between-different-generations-of-fighter-aircrafts
 
. . .
Good catch. Wud love to hear from experts on it.
Thanks for bringing in this aspect.

I only ask because I have come across such articles for the last 10+ years now quoting all sorts of percentages (depending on the defintion) that I have lost track...anywhere from 20% to 80%...sometimes using various combinations of volume/weight/value.

I personally do not see the big deal in highlighting what is purely indigenous and what isn't (by any of the definitions)...what matters is the capability/cost and the ability of India to use its know-how and labour optimally to achieve the best result in this.
 
.
I personally do not see the big deal in highlighting what is purely indigenous and what isn't (by any of the definitions)...what matters is the capability/cost and the ability of India to use its know-how and labour optimally to achieve the best result in this.

Totally agreed.
 
. .
Is the 35% meant by weight, volume or value?

@PARIKRAMA @Abingdonboy
Actually his choice of words is the issue
Even otherwise it has only 35% indigenous inputs rest all are imported

If the word "inputs" what he used in the above statement, what I understand as a layman, he may be hinting that Tejas is having more of foreign consultation based approach towards completion over perhaps our own.

or

our own internal contribution in terms of final aircraft in terms of value is very limited,

The first assertion of aircraft completion part goes a bit haywired because Lockheed Martin and Boeing did not get clearance for consultation from US government and French help was particular to specific aspects which also did not bear full completion of their goals. So inputs at 35% in terms of project completion would be a bit extreme to state.

The second assertion just a day before in a parliamentary question answer session was stated as this
In a written reply to Parliamant on Tuesday, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said ....

The indigenous content of LCA is about 70 per cent and import content is about 30 per cent. The aircraft is indigenously designed and developed and the technology for production of this aircraft is available in the country.


Source:
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/16...ft_To_Be_Inducted_From_2018__Manohar_Parrikar
http://defencenews.in/article/Indigenous-content-in-Indias-LCA-is-about-70-percent-6857


Thus in terms of content its 70%.

IMHO and very personal understanding there are few points which needs to be understood
  • There is a sustained marketing campaign against LCA Tejas going on for quite some time
  • The obvious foolish fight made out was Tejas vs Rafale in spite of clear understanding that roles and class of aircraft is different and the missions are also fully different
  • The marketing campaigns by SAAB and Lockheed Martin seems to always suggest especially SAAB that Tejas is an unfinished product and SAAB expertise will move the product line as well as indigenous tag further up.
  • This marketing campaign have many Ex IAF people roped in along with Defence Reporters, analysts to paint opinions and make a more of public image of anti Tejas and Pro Saab/LM based single engine fighters.
  • IAF till now right from MMRCA days have not said any pro statement in favour of Gripen or F16 so its clear their choice in terms of single engine fighter is Tejas only. The Gripen Ride was an invitation only and our ACM still did not make any pro Gripen comment.
  • Yet you keep on seeing Anti Tejas articles which only criticize but gives no solution to address the so called concerns which the writers raise day and night. And much of their solution is back of hand campaigning for Gripen or F16s
In short all such articles and opinions to paint public opinion against Tejas is just a sustained campaign funded by vested interests. In street lingo its called "lifafa journalism" .. lifafa meaning envelope implying money paid for writing such things..

HF marut is gone long long back so remembering and writing in favour of it and saying we should have done X and Y is beating the dead horse again and again. CDS and babudom is a known issue but saying that is the only reason related to Tejas program shows that writer still does not understand the project management challenges and issues which were there in Tejas program. Its a separate topic all together.
 
. . . . . . .

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom