I'm not aware as to the current level of induction of LCA in the IAF, what you are stating is something that is somewhat questionable. See, when I take a look at the statement that the IAF's requirement is quite different so on and so forth, I am reminded that this project was launched in the mid 1980's. The first flight was around 2000-01 and It's been almost 4 decades since its inception and two decades almost since its first flight and the emerging project has yet to satisfy the requirements it was launched to fulfill?
If the requirements have been revised and it is trying to meet the revised requirements then that makes sense -- to a layman at least. Coming from a background of business and marketing, the literal first step in the whole process is the identification of needs/wants of the consumer for which you are building the product. Everything else follows, and if a company essentially goes back to step # 1 after delivering a workable product 2 decades prior, something seriously wrong is happening.
By extension, you can even call in to question the decision making of those in power, for they weren't able to correctly project what they would be facing in the future. The project has costed the Indian nation over a billion dollars already from what I hear and the fact that the argument being used to save face is that it is the requirements that are being constantly revised -- then for those of us with a bit of info in business and marketing would deem it anything but a face save.
Sir, I was replying to trolls only. If you asked my honest opinion then I have different!
HAL was not having experience, qualification and infrastructure to jump from 2nd gen fighter (HAL Ajeet) to 4th generation. Even they were not designed and developed any aircraft including major and critical parts. These all processes took much time and also delayed the project.
During the period, technologies get change on a regular basis. What are the benefits if you are developing a outdated aircraft at the time others are having latest one?
Again to me! it is all about requirements. North Korea is still flying mig 19? However, The world is moving to 5th and 6th generations fighter aircrafts.
Since HAL and India was not capable enough to develop a aircraft in 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.. HAL tejas is provided a opportunity to step up infrastructure and
Aero and aviation Industry in India.
Moreover, I am agreed that is is costed the Indian nation over a billion dollars but we have able to crossed the milestone and setup the infrastructure.
I would be agreed that
HAL Tejas MK1 is a failure if it was outdated compare to
Jf17 block 2. but, knowing the fact that technologics "
Jf17 block 2 does not give advantage over to
HAL Tejas MK1". Therefore, I Can not count as failure.
JF 17 is having advantage of production, deployment and flying experience.
Now, If I look at development then clearly found that PAF was in hurray to induct including JF17 block 1 because PAF was having only F16 (A decent and capable 4th gen aircraft) .
However, IAF was not in hurray to induct at the same time because IAF was having Su 30 mki, Mirage 2000 and Mig 29.
Also, there is no doubt that there were many technical challenges and it caused the more delay.
Looking to positive sides after 3 decades:
1. We will have HAL Tejas MK1a (A decent fighter to deal with any threat in 21st century as interceptor role in south Aisa).
2. Infrastructure, Aero and aviation Industry in India
3. years of experience for developing and testing a fighter aircraft
Now expected that next upcoming fighters will not take time to develop. If they will still take longer time to develop then it will be count a complete failure and waste of 30 years.
