'Make in India' Single engined fighter

[Pratyush]

I have seen some post about maintaining strategic autonomy by diversified procurement of weapon systems. But those supporting autonomy are missing the most important enablers of autonomy.

A strong domestic design and manufacturing base. Set it up and you will never be pressurized.

[Philip]

Some good news in this latest report.83 LCAs to be acquired.
http://www.defencenews.in/article/GOI-t ... ndian_Navy

[Pratyush]

Yes, but I would have preferred the the IAF would keep on ordering the Mk 1 till the Mk 2 is not fully certified. But still this is a huge bonus for domestic design.

Now the ball is in HAL s court. I hope and pray that they deliver on it.

[saptarishi]

saptarishi: are you a retired/serving Air Marshal?

P.S. You have committed harakiri by endorsing the Gripen on BRF.

I know pure harakiri hav. But i am backing Gripen after strong considerations and i have strong reasons for backing Gripen. You also know that if F-16 is the contender any day majority of us will back Gripen. If F-18 was there then i would think about the Advanced Super Hornet version and tot on GE F414 and AESA for AMCA but again for such high numbers Super Hornet is very very costly and we need money for FGFA ,TEJAS MK1A , Super-30 and AMCA.
We have to understand that our budget is limited. Any day i would have preferred more Tejas over any foreign fighter but sadly that is not happening. Believe me such a deal for 150 odd Gripen or for that matter F-16 will help Tejas but won't kill it. IAF will go for the minimum committed 120 numbers.
I understand the apprehension of patriots here regarding the Tejas and whether Gripen will kill it or not . I fear the same but i feel Tejas has passed that stage . It will be inducted in numbers unlike Arjun since IAF is much more pro-indigenous product purchase than our army which continues to search for foreign artillery, tanks and rifles when Kalyani Bharat Forge/Tata/L&T/OFB have produced good artillery guns , ARJUN MK2 is ready and India has rifles like EXCALIBUR AND MCIWS .

[amit]

You wrote a wonderful post and raised valid points. I commend and respect you for bringing facts and figures to the table. It is becoming such a rarity, that it is refreshing. I agree with some parts of your post and disagree with others. I will reply tomorrow.

Thanks Indranil, will look out for your response.

Meanwhile just to follow on to my previous post, here's some more interesting info - a bit dated but important nevertheless as it shows the timeline - about how China first started what we call screwdrivergiri and then went on to more ambitious stuff.

China to Compete With Boeing, Airbus in Passenger-Jet Game

The people leading China’s push into the commercial-jet business aren’t dumb, and they’ve gained much of the technical and engineering know-how they need by cooperating with Boeing and Airbus. A consortium of Chinese companies known as China Aviation Industries Corporation (AVIC-I) produces components for Boeing’s 747 and 787 widebodies and operates a final assembly line for the Airbus A320.

Another report from even further back 2008:

Link

AVIC was reorganized in October. The country's two aviation industry conglomerates, AVIC-I (China Aviation Industry Corporation I) and AVIC-II (China Aviation Industry Corporation II) were merged in an effort to make a bigger impact internationally.

Miao Wei, vice minister of Industry and Information Technology, said on Monday that the Chinese government encourages development of export-oriented aviation products of civilian use either independently or through cooperative manner.

"The government will also encourage efforts designed to enlarge the size of production of civilian aviation components via subcontracts," said Miao.

There's more stuff on this, if one cares to ask Googal Chacha nicely. But my point is this, I would postulate that what China embarked on about a decade ago, starting with screwdrivergiri on civilian aircraft side (because military was a big No, No due to sanctions) this government is trying to do via this Make in India deal.

China dangled the carrot of its huge civilian aircraft needs to get Boeing and Airbus plus the other sub-assembly suppliers interested in setting up shop in China. India, IMHO, is dangling this huge fighter aircraft order as a similar carrot to get either F16 or Gripen assembly line in. I personally think the twin engine stuff is just garam hawa to get everybody confused.

At the end of the day it will all depend on how good a learning the local partner does and how innovative they are in absorbing the technology, supply chain organisation and manufacturing processes. They can very well botch up there, it's not a given they will be successful. But someone had to make an effort to break out of this vicious cycle of ever expanding defence needs of the IAF being thwarted by poor delivery by PSUs leading to exorbitant imports of gold plated fighters.

And by the way isn't it interesting that China started to tout the Comac C919, roughly five to six years after Airbus set up their manufacturing line for the A320 in China? C919, is theoretically, a direct competitor to the A320.

Bottomline, I personally think its a risky gambit, but at the very worst India will end up with around 200 odd (I think that's the baksheeh for knowhow, tech transfer) reasonably good aircraft with zero learning. On an optimistic level, it will lead to the creation of a nascent private sector aerospace industry. Modi admires the way China does things, I think he's trying to take page out of their book.

PS: Now that the 120+ LCA orders seem to be confirmed, if we go by the Business Standard report, I think this fear of "killing off" the LCA program can be laid to rest. It remains to be seen if HAL will now increase its production line to 16 a year. If they don't someone in that organisation needs big jhapad.

And also, hopefully by the time the full order is met, MK2 will transition from a paper plane into something that's flying and ready for production. If the government supports it, as I think it will provided this government stays in power, money will be found for IAF to induct them in large numbers.

JMT and all that.

------
Added later: If you take a step back and look at the overall Chinese economy and then pick three strategic sectors, thermal power plants, telecom equipment and nuclear reactors, you also see the same start: screwdrivergiri that was used for the basic learning and then moving on to understanding the technology and in some cases bettering it.

In each of the three sectors, global leaders like Ericson, Westinghouse et al were invited to set up shop to take advantage of the huge Chinese market but with a rider, they had to partner with a local company. These local companies have names that are familiar today, Huawei and ZTE to name two.

Once they acquired a critical mass and understanding of the product, through a combination of hard work, extremely intelligent observation and plain copyright/IP stealing, then the playing field was changed to the extent that only local Chinese champions got digs into the lucrative home market.

But in the end you have a Huawei which is now among the best in the business in telecom equipment plus a host of other things.

So IMO, never underestimate the power of screwdrivergiri!

If it's done properly then it can be potentially transformational. If it's done the way BEL or the OFBs have gone about it then the net result is zilch. Another example of improving on screwdrivergiri, Indian Navy's latest ships which build on old Soviet designs so much so that in many cases they are better today than their Russian analogues.

I think the hope here is that a private sector player will have the incentive to try and learn as much as they can and then branch out. Will it happen? Only time will tell. But as I wrote previously, if it's an option of sitting on your hands and letting status quo rule, or to go and try to do something to break the cycle, then I'd personally settle for the later any day.

[Cosmo_R]

...
I felt this because MoD had parked Rs51,000 crores in HAL which was asking for Rs 2500 crores to ramp up LCA production and showing interest earned as profit.

If this not a scam what is?

Yes and Modi specifically warned them (along with other PSUs) that this was no longer acceptable

[Mihir]

Marten, may I respectfully suggest that real cognitive dissonance is when folks harp about the purported ridiculousness of HAL investing in increased production without firm orders, when it has been shown that HAL has done exactly that more than once, and that it is the standard worldwide?

You haven't really shown where in the world it happens. The example of LM for F35 was not relevant. And for the same reason neither would Rafale or EF2000 count.

HAL cannot do that unless IAF places firm orders because it will invite CAG censure and mean the HAL head honchos need MOD protection. Parrikar got 120 aircraft - only 80Mk1A out of a tightfisted IAF. MOF funding is limited and the MMRCA boondoggle is swallowing funds too.

Jay and Karan, news reports from 2015 indicated that HAL is increasing capacity from 8 to 16 aircraft a year based on Parrikars decision and the Letter of Intent. Here's what Ajai Shukla reported at that time.

"Parrikar’s decisive move cuts through a Gordian knot that has bedevilled Tejas production. For years Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), the agency that will mass-produce the Tejas, has resisted increasing production-line capacity, because the IAF has only committed to buying 40 fighters. In a chicken-and-egg situation, the IAF cites HAL’s slow production rate as the reason for not ordering more Tejas.

The result: in the last two years, HAL has built just one Tejas. Meanwhile, the IAF responds to its dwindling fighter numbers --- now just 34 squadrons --- with demands for quickly buying large numbers of the Dassault Rafale from France.

Parrikar calculates that, with an order for 100 Tejas in hand, HAL will have the business case for quickly boosting production to at least 16 fighters per year.

[JayS]

Jay and Karan, news reports from 2015 indicated that HAL is increasing capacity from 8 to 16 aircraft a year based on Parrikars decision and the Letter of Intent. Here's what Ajai Shukla reported at that time.

"Parrikar’s decisive move cuts through a Gordian knot that has bedevilled Tejas production. For years Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), the agency that will mass-produce the Tejas, has resisted increasing production-line capacity, because the IAF has only committed to buying 40 fighters. In a chicken-and-egg situation, the IAF cites HAL’s slow production rate as the reason for not ordering more Tejas.

The result: in the last two years, HAL has built just one Tejas. Meanwhile, the IAF responds to its dwindling fighter numbers --- now just 34 squadrons --- with demands for quickly buying large numbers of the Dassault Rafale from France.

Parrikar calculates that, with an order for 100 Tejas in hand, HAL will have the business case for quickly boosting production to at least 16 fighters per year.

Mihir garu, HAL submitted proposal for 16/yr last year, almost a yr ago. Its still pending at MOD, last time I checked. Let MOD first clear it, then HAL can start working on it as they will get the money from GOI then - 2500Cr are asked for.

Even this DAC approval only means RFP process to be started. We are yet to see when the contract will be actually inked and advance payment be given for it. I hope it will be quick. And I hope also for penalty clauses to be put under the contract for HAL for delivery and quality. Its not about the money (since its GOI to GOI transaction) but about the performance guarantee.

[shiv]

And I hope also for penalty clauses to be put under the contract for HAL for delivery and quality. Its not about the money (since its GOI to GOI transaction) but about the performance guarantee.

The problem is one branch of government cannot punish its own. HAL cannot be punished by the government by penalties. A private concern will lose orders, share value will fall, people will lose jobs. But HAL has permanent lifetime jobs. I have lived all my life not knowing exactly who will pay me tomorrow and I sometimes wonder how it feels to enter a job where your life is looked after until you retire and after you retire whether you excel or not. That is an Indian government job.

[sivab]

https://twitter.com/rajatpTOI/status/795645683189452800

Rajat Pandit ‏@rajatpTOI 40m40 minutes ago New Delhi, India
Defence Acquisitions Council just gave initial approvals (Acceptance of Necessity) for proposals worth Rs 82,117 crore. THEY ARE NOT DEALS!

[sivab]

https://twitter.com/nitingokhale/status ... 1175302144

Nitin A. Gokhale ‏@nitingokhale 38m38 minutes ago
Nitin A. Gokhale Retweeted Narendra Joshi
Incorrect info, IMHO

Narendra Joshi @narendrapjoshi
@band318 @nitingokhale 86 Tejas ordered / cleared by DAC today ! Decks cleared for Lockheed Martin / Grippen deal in next 45 days !

[JayS]

The problem is one branch of government cannot punish its own. HAL cannot be punished by the government by penalties. A private concern will lose orders, share value will fall, people will lose jobs. But HAL has permanent lifetime jobs. I have lived all my life not knowing exactly who will pay me tomorrow and I sometimes wonder how it feels to enter a job where your life is looked after until you retire and after you retire whether you excel or not. That is an Indian government job.

I wrote a reply to your post but then I realised perhaps the only thing that will make difference in your opinion is good performance by HAL. So, lets wait and watch.

[JayS]

afriend who has no interest in defense said - we should go in for transferring both lines F 16 and F 18

I laughed and said - nice dream but cannot afford unless the IAF is not expected to order them

now shukla says this


strange

Yesterday I too felt India needs to get both F-16 and F-18 lines and start new aerospace lines to parallel HAL.

If US can have LM, Boeing, Northrup as main aero companies, India could have 3 lines.

Off course spin of HAL.

I felt this because MoD had parked Rs51,000 crores in HAL which was asking for Rs 2500 crores to ramp up LCA production and showing interest earned as profit.

If this not a scam what is?

This is not a scam, its MoD money kept by MoD owned company in bank and earned profit, which MoD can take away anytime and indeed they take lot of dividends from them (GOI recently took 6000Cr from HAL as share buy back). HAL cannot divert that money without MoD nod. And I have already pointed out MoD has already taken away that money to form a War Chest. See its MoD which gave that money to HAL. MoD routinely keeps a lot of money unspent and returns to MoF. MoD also kept some $2-3B in some bank accounts in US for no damn reason, which again is recovered by MP. One should be asking MoD, in fact, on what grounds they paid that money to HAL in first place. Neither you could blame a PSU to have stymied AF from funding other procurement programs when we know their own allotted funds are not fully spent by MoD every year.

[ldev]

IIRC, APJ Kalam only spent a couple of days visiting NASA facilities and that was it. For the record, he wasn't very good as a rocket scientist either (If I recall correctly, he graduated last in his class at Madras Institute of Tech.). His real talent was as a manager. It is no joke organizing a bunch of scientists and knowing when to stand back and not interfere with their work, this was something he really excelled at.

Not to nitpick but just to set the record straight, he was with NASA for 8-9 months which is long enough to learn quite a bit for somebody who is already trained:

How India’s Late President Learned About Rocket Science With NASA

But the first time I met A.P.J. Abdul Kalam—or Kalam, as I always knew him—was in a foreign country: the U.S. I’d gone there in December, 1962, and he followed in March, 1963. We were part of a seven-member team dispatched by Vikram Sarabhai, the father of India’s space program, to train with NASA and learn the art of assembling and launching small rockets for collecting scientific data.
I’d already spent a few months training at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Centre in Greenbelt, Maryland, when Kalam arrived from India. Soon, we were working side by side at NASA’s launch facility in Wallops Island, Virginia. Our lodgings were called the B.O.Q., or the Bachelor Officer’s Quarters, and we’d lunch together at the cafeteria where, because we were both vegetarians, we survived mainly on mashed potatoes, boiled beans, peas, bread and milk. Weekends in Wallops Island were lonely affairs, as the nearest town of Pocomoke City was an hour’s drive away. Thankfully for us, NASA put on a free flight to Washington D.C. for its recruits, so we would head up the to American capital on Friday nights and return to Wallops on the Monday morning shuttle.

It was a memorable experience. I remember one training session where Kalam had to fire a dummy rocket when the countdown hit zero. It was only after half a dozen attempts when he kept firing the rocket either a few seconds too early or too late that the man who went on to become one of India’s best known rocket scientists managed to get it right.(You are correct about his scientific skills though!!)

Our American sojourn ended in December, 1963, when we returned to India to help set up a domestic rocket launching facility on the outskirts of Trivandrum, the capital of the southern Indian state of Kerala. It was very different world from NASA. India’s space program was still in its early years and we had to swap our weekend shuttles to Washington for bicycles, our sole mode of transportation in those days.

[ramana]

jayS, If that was the case why was HAL asking for Rs. 2500 Crores for extending the LCA mfg facility? Something is not right here.

That Chairman needs to go for this duplicity. Then truth will emerge.

[JayS]

jayS, If that was the case why was HAL asking for Rs. 2500 Crores for extending the LCA mfg facility? Something is not right here.

That Chairman needs to go for this duplicity. Then truth will emerge.

Because the Chairman or the HAL BoG has no power to take decision above 1000Cr. Even if HAL had money they would still require MoD to approve proposal to divert it. And the approval is not forthcoming.

I have said this previously, will say it again - we have too see PSUs as what they are -extension of GOI - with limited financial (in case they are "Ratna" else this one also Zero) and zero administrative autonomy. If we see PSU as independent units who could have done anything but didnt do it since they were lazy bums, then we will end up with wrong conclusions in our analysis of situation.

Do we have someone who understands bureaucratic structure of PSU's and can explain the hierarchy more precisely??

PS: This is the rule stating extent of financial autonomy for Navratna PSU (from wiki):

Up to Rs. 1,000 crore or 15% of their net worth on a single project or 30% of their net worth in the whole year (not exceeding Rs. 1,000 crores).

HAL net worth is 17000Cr. Also note than HAL was given Navratna status only in 2009.

[vera_k]

Boeing’s retiring boomers underscore risks for jet maker

U.S. manufacturers are grappling with a looming shortage of skilled workers. Almost 3.5 million manufacturing positions will need to be filled over the next decade as baby boomers retire, and 2 million of those jobs could remain vacant because of manufacturing’s fading appeal to millennials

This generational change means there's an opening for people to step in. Unlike H1B/IT, these jobs are not easily replicated elsewhere due to the capital investment needed. If manufacturing deals can be structured to lure some of these facilities to locate in India, it will be a good thing.

[Kartik]

Some interesting points that were made regarding the Boeing Advanced Super Hornet concept and the CFTs that were tested for the Super Hornet.

From AW&ST

As the U.S. Navy ponders future purchases of the F/A-18, it is showing growing interest in the comprehensive structures, systems and propulsion upgrade package proposed by industry earlier this year that would extend the combat life of the current fleet.

One element of Boeing's Advanced Super Hornet plan receiving close attention is large conformal fuel tanks (CFT). In flight tests, they have shown the potential for marginal drag reduction and other benefits over the unmodified aircraft, despite their size and capacity. With the ability to hold 3,500 lb. of fuel, the tanks could add 260-nm combat range to the Super Hornet and, in the case of the EA-18G Growler electronic-attack version, would extend time on station and bring-back weight.

“Boeing looked at ways of bringing the Super Hornet into the 2030 threat environment in an affordable way, and Northrop Grumman's main role in this was development of the CFT,” says Northrop Grumman F/A-18 programs director and chief engineer, Bob Walke.

Revealing more details about the CFT development and plans for the production version, Northrop says the prototype units went from “napkin to first flight” in just 10 months. “The effort began in 2010 with low-level trade study work until 2012, when the decision was made to make a prototype happen quickly,” says Walke. Following a go-ahead in September 2012, the tank design was completed in January 2013, assembly began in May, delivery started in early July and flight tests on a leased F/A-18 were underway in August.

The CFTs sit atop the upper fuselage on either side of the central spine and run 24 ft. in length from the aft cockpit to the leading edge of each vertical tail. At 4.3 ft. wide at the broadest point, the CFTs hug the upper fuselage surface, rising to a maximum height of only 1.8 ft. just forward of the wing leading edge.

Shaped for low drag and stealth, the test CFTs were not filled with fuel but were otherwise aerodynamically representative of the production tanks.

“We knew it was essentially a zero-drag configuration and, although there was no content in the tanks, we could measure drag through fuel flow. We actually saw a little better performance, as it improves transonic transition,” Walke adds.

In flight tests this August back-to-back comparisons of a “clean” F-18 against the CFT-configured F-18 showed “same or better” fuel flow for the modified aircraft at the same gross weight and Mach 0.84 cruise conditions at 34,000 ft.

Although they look the same, the prototype CFTs weighed 1,500 lb.; production fuel tanks would weigh 870 lb. “We simplified the design substantially,” says Walke. “For instance the prototype had metal lower skins and floors, whereas the production version would be composite like the upper skins. It would also have fewer aluminum frames.”

If sanctioned, the production version of the tank also will be modified to include plumbing for pumping fuel, as well as enclosures and openings for cooling and conditioning ducts.

“We have three openings,” says Walke. “One for the fuel oil heat exchangers, another for the liquid-cooling system ground fan, which is used for the radar system ground check out, and the third, which is an environmental control system auxiliary scoop that opens up on the ground and below Mach 0.5.”

“The CFT is production-ready now should the Navy make that decision,” says Northrop Grumman F/A-18 program manager John Murnane who adds that “in flight tests, pilots reported it flew just like a Super Hornet. It accomplished everything we wanted it to do. The Navy is showing strong interest in this and we're ready to do it.”

Capt. Frank Morley, program director for the Navy, confirms the service's interest. Commenting at a recent ceremony marking the 35th anniversary of the F-18, he says the CFT option has “certainly got our interest,” among all the various upgrades available.

The company is optimistic the Navy will indicate its interest more substantially in the next program objective memorandum, a planning document for pending procurement. Production could begin “maybe by 2016,” says Murnane, with deliveries starting about three years after receiving the official go-ahead.

The CFT is also attracting interest from Australia, the other operator of the Super Hornet and Growler, and it is designed to be retrofittable for new-build aircraft. “The intent is to be able to install it in a shift,” says Walke. The CFT bolts onto the structure at three attachment points per side, which are designed to keep loads isolated from the rest of the structure and vice versa.

[brar_w]

“We knew it was essentially a zero-drag configuration and, although there was no content in the tanks, we could measure drag through fuel flow. We actually saw a little better performance, as it improves transonic transition,” Walke adds.

In flight tests this August back-to-back comparisons of a “clean” F-18 against the CFT-configured F-18 showed “same or better” fuel flow for the modified aircraft at the same gross weight and Mach 0.84 cruise conditions at 34,000 ft.

F-16 an F-18E/F are very different fighters. The F-18E/F's has fairly poor acceleration to begin with across the envelope. Its already a fairly draggy design so you aren't starting from a hot-rod position as you would on a lightly loaded F-16.

[Suresh S]

Good post Amit above about value of screwdrivergiri in the right hands

[Chinmay]

Super post Amit

[Cosmo_R]

Boeing’s retiring boomers underscore risks for jet maker

U.S. manufacturers are grappling with a looming shortage of skilled workers. Almost 3.5 million manufacturing positions will need to be filled over the next decade as baby boomers retire, and 2 million of those jobs could remain vacant because of manufacturing’s fading appeal to millennials

This generational change means there's an opening for people to step in. Unlike H1B/IT, these jobs are not easily replicated elsewhere due to the capital investment needed. If manufacturing deals can be structured to lure some of these facilities to locate in India, it will be a good thing.

Sorry that is just too far sighted thinking for us

[Cosmo_R]

..
I wrote a reply to your post but then I realised perhaps the only thing that will make difference in your opinion is good performance by HAL. So, lets wait and watch.

HAL is way past its wait and watch date. Track records do matter in extrapolating to the future. No credibility. Let's not cloak this in Khadi. The IAF needs 200 a/c by 2021. HAL does not have enough screwdrivers (or know how) to make that happen.

Doing the same thing gets you the same result. It's time we tried something very different. HAL is not part of that.

[Cosmo_R]

And I hope also for penalty clauses to be put under the contract for HAL for delivery and quality. Its not about the money (since its GOI to GOI transaction) but about the performance guarantee.

The problem is one branch of government cannot punish its own. HAL cannot be punished by the government by penalties. A private concern will lose orders, share value will fall, people will lose jobs. But HAL has permanent lifetime jobs. I have lived all my life not knowing exactly who will pay me tomorrow and I sometimes wonder how it feels to enter a job where your life is looked after until you retire and after you retire whether you excel or not. That is an Indian government job.

+1

The Government banks are POS. Major cause of economic drag

[amit]

Killing the LCA seems to be off the table for now

Edited: typo corrected

[shiv]

Killing the LTA seems to be off the table for now

I was unable to see any mention of LTA in that link

[amit]

Killing the LTA seems to be off the table for now

I was unable to see any mention of LTA in that link

New Delhi: The government will spend Rs 67,000 crore on made-in-India military hardware, with a defence ministry panel today clearing the purchase of 83 Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, 15 Light Combat helicopters and 464 T-90 tanks.

To make up the numbers, the Air Force has ordered 80 more Tejas fighters and their total number will be 120 -- the delivery will depend on HAL's production capacity.

Oh I get it

LTA=LCA Sorry bad typo, damn auto correct on the phone.

[shiv]

With our penchant for calling things L this and L that - LCA, LCH etc we do have an LTA as well a "Light Transport Aircraft" requirement, currently met by Dornier 228 which I believe has been selected by Air India to serve third tier feederliner routes under Modis udan scheme of inexpensive air travel. The Saras was supposed to get there but Saras is in Ajit's (not Doval) Liquid oxygen

[shiv]

From AW&ST

in the case of the EA-18G Growler electronic-attack version, would extend time on station and bring-back weight.

An interesting statement there. The Growler of course has expensive electronics that can't be jettisoned which count as "bring back weight" and the aircraft must land on a carrier with all that extra weight

But a point unrelated to the CFT/ no CFT debate as such is the amount of munitions that an aircraft carries on patrol will be limited not just by weight but the fact that some things like missiles, once armed for combat, use up some of their operational life if unused. Also dumb bombs if unused will probably be jettisoned - before a carrier landing

This would call for careful mission planning and although I frequently see on BRF the desire that 8-10 AAMs be carried so an aircraft is "armed to the teeth", the fact is those mijjiles will all go one step closer towards becoming date expired junk if they are simply carried and not used.

[JayS]

..
I wrote a reply to your post but then I realised perhaps the only thing that will make difference in your opinion is good performance by HAL. So, lets wait and watch.

HAL is way past its wait and watch date. Track records do matter in extrapolating to the future. No credibility. Let's not cloak this in Khadi. The IAF needs 200 a/c by 2021. HAL does not have enough screwdrivers (or know how) to make that happen.

Doing the same thing gets you the same result. It's time we tried something very different. HAL is not part of that.

We'll see which company can bring 200 of any type of Jet in IAF by 2021.

[RohitAM]

I have a feeling that the LCA will be the last "indigenous fighter" manufactured by HAL (the FGFA will probably be the last collaborative fighter manufacturing venture as well), and that the PSU will be asked to concentrate on the non-fighting air units (transports, trainers, AEW's) and the helicopters (Dhruv, LCH, LUH), as well as the current aircraft upgrades, which they are anyways doing already. The new manufacturing options are all going to private entities (Rafale with Reliance, Apaches and Chinooks with TASL) - and this new MII fighter option is going to the private sector as well. It wouldn't even surprise me if the GOI suddenly turned around and asked a private manufacturer to take over the contract for the FGFA manufacture from HAL, with the private company negotiating with the Russian R&D and manufacturing setup for the aircraft with the GOI's blessings.

I think the same will be done for the Army progressively as well (the indigenous follow-up to the Arjun will be co-developed by a private entity and DRDO and manufactured by the private entity, as is probably going to be the case for future artillery acquisitions). The Navy is far ahead of the other two services in this regard, and the day it thinks that the private shipyards can handle its warship building capabilities, the Naval Design Bureau will be sitting with them working on the designs of its next-generation warships and aiming for 3-4 year roll-outs of its Destroyers, Frigates etc. instead of the current 5-7 year time frames we see from the government shipyards. I don't even see any government shipyard except Cochin getting the IAC-2 (primarily because of its experience with building the IAC-1), but if one of the private shipyards collaborates with a foreign entity to gain AC building experience (Newport News, for example, in lieu of getting the EMALS), the Navy might opt for that option as well.

If the ADA is going to be the lead R&D entity on the AMCA, I'm sure it will be instructed by the GOI to take the LCA learnings on board - develop the aircraft for easy manufacturing instead of treating it like a Science project, involve the IAF right off the bat, and bring in a private player who will help in co-development as well as gain understanding of the platform in order to setup a manufacturing chain for the platform in double quick time, starting with the prototypes. Won't happen immediately, but I'm quite confident that we won't be cribbing about HAL not being able to deliver more than 16 aircrafts/year in 2026, unless its the FGFA. Taking away the fighter manufacturing from HAL will automatically force the organization to trim itself down via VRS and what not - at least, I'm hoping this happens, since this seems to be the easiest way out for the GOI with regards to the mess which the Defense PSU's have been mired in for decades. It will be easy for the GOI to justify this as well: A shrug of the shoulders, "Well, you competed for the tender, and you got outbid. We can't help you with that - this is an open competition, and we don't want to be sued for preferential treatment. You should've done better." A couple of such tender losses, and HAL will get the message loud and clear.

[nachiket]

We'll see which company can bring 200 of any type of Jet in IAF by 2021.

Cosmo_R has peddled this fantasy here in multiple posts despite several people (including those in favor of this F-16 screwdriver-giri) pointing out that it is impossible to do.

[Indranil]

Amit ji,

Sorry for the delay in replying.

You talked about China and how "privatization" is helping them, and why India should follow in principle. Privatization is not the panaecea. otherwise, all capatilist countries would have been flying their own airplanes and Nazi Germany and the Soviet union would not have any world-class designers. Even in China, are the new designs coming from Airbuses's assembly lines? No, they are all coming from AVIC companies. Therefore, I contend that you putting the wrong fruit on the wrong tree.

It has been repeated again and again and again. Technology is people, people are technology. No where is it more true than designers of complex high-tech systems. You can train assemblers in a few years (TASL/Mazagaon), but designers need two to three generations (ISRO/DRDL/ADA/NPOL). There is no shortcut to this. You cannot develop designers in 5-10 years by using an assembly line (private or otherwise). china did not take any shortcuts. They painstakingly flew ridiculously outdated fighters, bombers, transports and commuters that their design houses could cobble together through the 80s, 90s and the 2000s. After two generation of designers, they now have world class teams who have almost caught up with the world-leaders. And they have done so in other fields as well, e.g. micro processor design. And no it is not trhough privatization.

Aerospace is an interesting field. It needs a very high tech ecosystem but cannot support it ecosystem on its own. China stole a march on us in this sector during the past three decades. Their govt. took wholistic decisions to build sector after sector as nation. They consolidated markets, spent on RnD making it possible for the ecosystem to grow up. On the other hand we had the family!!! Finally, we have a strong govt. at our helm and I am hopeful "Make in India" can bolster this ecosystem and the greatly reduced red-tape can break the shackles.

However, we should not pin our hopes on Make in India to get us designers of aeroplanes in India. India has to go through the pains of bringing them up. Indian Navy, Indian space Science, Indian missiles, Indian automobiles have already paid that price and they can reap the benefits now. The Indian aviation sector did not. There are no shortcuts. If we want our designers, we have to go through those pains. Fly the damn LCA: 300, 400 of them! Fly the HTT-40 although it is not as refined as a matured PC-7 MkII.

If inorganic growth is desired, look at KAI, Embraer, Bombardier etc. They don't license manufacture. They have hooked into the global supply chain by asking internation designers and manufacturers to design and build parts of their planes. It is a much needed policy change that we require in India. For example, ADA should be asked to get Boeing or LM to design CFTs for LCA.

Let there be competition. But competition between domestic products. For example, scrap this NCAD program. Instead let the Ministry of aviation pull all the airlines together and say that it will give a tax break to all airlines who buy Indian built plane. the larger the Indian content, the larger the break. Let Tata change the C-295 into a civilian aircraft with collaboration with Airbus and IATN. Or let HAL/Reliance come to the party with Antonov. Let there be faceoffs between these domestic products. On the contrary, license production of F-16 is competition to a domestic product. That makes zero sense and should be scrapped. 100 LCAs instead of 100 F-16s doesn't tilt the table in operational readiness by much anyways.

P.S. It is hong (red) bao (bag/envelop).

[Rakesh]

We'll see which company can bring 200 of any type of Jet in IAF by 2021.

200 by 2021 only applies to HAL. The phoren companies are allowed to take their time. Even if it is not done by 2031, it is okay. After all, the ToT will be that intensive.

[Pratyush]

IR + 125 billion.

OT for the thread., Russia used to have a condition for its airlines that for every plane that you buy from abroad, you have to buy one from a Russian manufacturer. Not sure if it is still in force.

[hnair]

The relevant point I am making is that it is the hands on experience learned in a successful organization that is more important then the transfer of blueprints of building a specific aircraft which is what everyone seems to be clamoring for i.e. TOT. Kalam could have learned space technology anywhere, NASA or in Russia. But it was the fundamental principles he learned in a successful organization and then built on those principles to successfully build a series of rocket launchers in India.

nonsense. When he was touring US as part of a team back in 1963 and 64 , Kalam-sahib was a very junior engineer. He had the time to learn the fundamental principles of NASA? As if, at the height of cold war, they opened the doors of their design and engineering teams to him? You are repeating the same old innuendo that claimed Kalam-sahib stole the Scout design for SLV. He came into prominence only by the 80s, after his switch to DRDO. There are others in the ISRO management chain, who did more to contribute towards what the launch vehicle scene is today, AFTER he left. And most of them has rarely set foot outside India

ISRO and BARC are two quintessentially Indian orgs, that grew in stature under non non-Indian entity's tutelage. HAL did not have the same mandate till now.

[amit]

You talked about China and how "privatization" is helping them, and why India should follow in principle. Privatization is not the panaecea. otherwise, all capatilist countries would have been flying their own airplanes and Nazi Germany and the Soviet union would not have any world-class designers. Even in China, are the new designs coming from Airbuses's assembly lines? No, they are all coming from AVIC companies. Therefore, I contend that you putting the wrong fruit on the wrong tree.

It has been repeated again and again and again. Technology is people, people are technology. No where is it more true than designers of complex high-tech systems. You can train assemblers in a few years (TASL/Mazagaon), but designers need two to three generations (ISRO/DRDL/ADA/NPOL). There is no shortcut to this. You cannot develop designers in 5-10 years by using an assembly line (private or otherwise). china did not take any shortcuts. They painstakingly flew ridiculously outdated fighters, bombers, transports and commuters that their design houses could cobble together through the 80s, 90s and the 2000s. After two generation of designers, they now have world class teams who have almost caught up with the world-leaders. And they have done so in other fields as well, e.g. micro processor design. And no it is not trhough privatization.

Indranil,

Please no "ji" for me! Thanks for your reply.

Now tell me something. Where do you think our bottleneck is? Is it in designers (ISRO/DRDO/ADA/NPOL) or in assembly line? I think the problem is in the assembly line manufacture because of the lack of an ecosystem, partly because of the cumbersome systems that the government organisations have in paying tier 2, 3 and 1 manufacturers.

I asked a rhetorical question in my last post. "Do you think that the private Indian player who partners either LM or Saab in making the aircraft would close down the factory and infrastructure once the production run in over?" I would say they won't. Now the question I ask you is this: Do you think this hypothetical private industry partner (hypothetical because everything is still up in the air) can tweak it's production line to make the MK2 or maybe the AMCA with due handholding by ADA?

If the answer is yes, then the investment is one worth making because we would have a far more efficient production set up than the one that's present in HAL today - a situation in which the head of the organisation has to take permission for a Babu to spend more that Rs1000 cr to upgrade infrastructure!

I know a couple of you have talked about HAL doing the hand holding and setting up a second assembly line in the private sector for Tejas. The question I ask you (again) is while theoretically this sounds reasonable, do you think it would be practically feasible, given the PSU mentality that pervades in HAL? I would postulate there will deep resistance from the management, afterall why would they want to help set up a competitor to their own line? But they perhaps can be taken care of, but what about the PSU unions? Recently the all India body has called for a strike to "protest the GoI's privatisation effort". Do you think the unions would keep quiet while a new production line is set up in the private sector?

I would tend to think that even if HAL is somehow cajoled, convinced or coerced to help a private sector company to set up a assembly line, there will still be deep institutional resistance within the MoD babudom itself. Look at shipbuilding. The Indian Navy desperately needs ships, the public sector yards are overstretched, and yet L&T, Pipavav shipyard and other private sector yards are starved of orders. Wasn't the deal that the public sector yards would handhold these private yards and teach them to build warships? What happened to that? Pipavav's old owners had to sell off due to the fact that they ran out of money because the over built in anticipation of Indian Navy orders which never came.

Besides, this also doesn't address the issue of a lack of good Tier 1 suppliers who can build whole sections of the plane for assembly.

Modi/Parrikar don't have silver bullet to change PSU attitudes overnight. So IMO this idea of HAL hand holding a private sector player and helping it to set up a 16 plane a year line, while simultaneously expanding its own line to 16 aircraft a year is like a nice science project. Great in theory but has little relation to real life realities.

China stole a march on us in this sector during the past three decades. Their govt. took wholistic decisions to build sector after sector as nation. They consolidated markets, spent on RnD making it possible for the ecosystem to grow up. On the other hand we had the family!!! Finally, we have a strong govt. at our helm and I am hopeful "Make in India" can bolster this ecosystem and the greatly reduced red-tape can break the shackles.

This is exactly what I think this move to have a another line of planes - which would useful for the IAF because it bolsters numbers with a plane which has few peers in this region - is all about.

However, we should not pin our hopes on Make in India to get us designers of aeroplanes in India. India has to go through the pains of bringing them up. Indian Navy, Indian space Science, Indian missiles, Indian automobiles have already paid that price and they can reap the benefits now. The Indian aviation sector did not. There are no shortcuts. If we want our designers, we have to go through those pains. Fly the damn LCA: 300, 400 of them! Fly the HTT-40 although it is not as refined as a matured PC-7 MkII.

I think you mentioned it, and I agree with you. In terms of military aircraft I don't think the bottleneck is in design, I think the bottleneck is in productionising the design. I think this play is about developing an entity that, hopefully, can do a better job at this than what HAL is doing currently. I don't think - and I also never said it that way - that this new private player, after doing the production run of 100-200 airplanes will suddenly develop designers who can design a fifth generation plane. But they may develop the expertise to productionise - along with the necessary ecosystem of suppliers - a MK2 or AMCA for the matter. In my best case scenario, this hypothetical entity can manufacture the MK2 while HAL can concentrate on the AMCA when the MK1A production run is over.

They have hooked into the global supply chain by asking internation designers and manufacturers to design and build parts of their planes. It is a much needed policy change that we require in India. For example, ADA should be asked to get Boeing or LM to design CFTs for LCA.

If this happens nothing like it. But I think it's unlikely. Don't forget the examples you gave build civilian aircraft like Comac in China. Such help would be IMO less forthcoming in military planes, unless a big carrot is dangled in front of them. I would say the 100-200 aircraft run for, say the F16 - if it happens would be the biggest single order for the plane outside of the US Air Force - (ditto for the Gripen, if it is selected) is the carrot that Modi/Parrikar is dangling in front of them.

Let there be competition. But competition between domestic products. For example, scrap this NCAD program. Instead let the Ministry of aviation pull all the airlines together and say that it will give a tax break to all airlines who buy Indian built plane. the larger the Indian content, the larger the break. Let Tata change the C-295 into a civilian aircraft with collaboration with Airbus and IATN. Or let HAL/Reliance come to the party with Antonov. Let there be faceoffs between these domestic products. On the contrary, license production of F-16 is competition to a domestic product. That makes zero sense and should be scrapped. 100 LCAs instead of 100 F-16s doesn't tilt the table in operational readiness by much anyways.

To be frank, when you look at the paucity of quality aeronautical engineers in the country I don't think the focus should be the civilian side to build a brand new mid haul Indian plane. This is because of the marginal benefit of a Indian build medium haul civilian plane (with a huge percentage of foreign components, including the engine) is not much. China is doing this because they don't have the military cooperation window open to them IMO. They are trying to maximise learning so as to apply to their military sector. Rather I would think it would be better to ask Airbus or Boeing to transfer a civilian air plane production line here like the Chinese did with A320. That would train a whole generation of aeronautical engineers.

Regarding numbers of LCA. When this discussion was going on, and when I first responded, there was still uncertainty about the number of LCAs that the IAF would order, and a lot of folks lamented that with this new fighter the IAF would not order any more than the 40 it had indicated. Well now we know better. Regarding numbers of planes made and the tranches, look it all depends on how committed the government is behind this product.

If you look at it, despite it's lackadaisical attitude towards defence, even the UPA over the past 10 years supported the programme even when the clamour was for it to be shut down (three-legged cheetah and all that). I would wonder why folks here think this present government would not be behind this plane, has there been any indications to this effect?

With regards to IAF, it does not earn a single rupee on its own and operates under the aegis of the GoI. Raha has indicated that his ideal squadron strength is 42. But tell me if the GoI tells him to induct a few more squadrons of MK2 and/or future tranches of the plane and pays for them do you think Raha or his successor would oppose this saying they already have enough planes? So 120 - 200 -300 LCA will depend on how fast they can be produced, what quality they are and if they remain contemporary (with upgrades). If all these criteria is met, I don't see how it's a zero sum game between the F16 (as an example) and LCA? Can you explain that?

P.S. It is hong (red) bao (bag/envelop).

Really? It depends on whether you are translating from Cantonese or Mandarin or Hokkien. It also depends on where you, as a Chinese stay. Let let's just say ang bao, hong bao and ang pao are all correct. And if there's any confusion please use the term red packet!

The final point I would like to say, which I've said before, Modi/Parrikar have realised that the system as it is today is not working. I think this realisation has been within the government for a long time. Now they had two choices. One was to sit on their hands, like the UPA had done, and the other was to try and disrupt the system. I think they chose the latter and I admit it's a risky gambit - it may, or may not work - but at least they are trying to break the vicious cycle of increasing threat perception of the IAF leading to their requirement for more and better aircraft, HAL's inability to deliver on time resulting in import of gold plated foreign maal. However, if it works then we get a second production line in the private sector which may be more efficient than the one we have. Heck if they need to they may even be able to compete with the Natashas with their Savitas when selling a product!

[srin]

@Indranil, @Amit, I'd like to butt in with one focussed opinion about privatization.

I don't have too much good opinion about corporates in India. I find them lacking in business sense, ability to gauge and take risks and don't think they are competent to run organizations. They do have good deal making skills due to connections and in some circles, it is who-you-know that matters more than what-you-know, but I haven't really come across MD-level people with skills I can respect.

We also can't wish away the PSUs. There is no one like GoI to make massive capital investment to create infrastructure. Even creating production lines to sure orders requires substantial initial capital outlay.

Despite all that, there is one important thing that you get due to privatization - hiring talent. There are probably many within our services (heck even in BRF) with varying skills who'd want to - and probably can - contribute to our defence preparedness in different capacities. It is almost impossible (or not worth it) to get into a PSU or a Govt org and if it were so, there aren't many places where "good stuff" is done. During my PG, I had a couple of classmates from DRDO who were of the opinion that if you were lucky, you got into good labs. Else, you get some project where nothing seems to happen.

OTOH, in a private sector, it is highly probable that they are open to hiring people with diverse skills. There is also a chance - initially very small, but a definite one - that you can explore more than you are required to. And having multitude of these private orgs results in ability to shift jobs if you are dissatisfied - like anyone in software industry knows.

This also establishes market rate for the skills and when a lot of talented and experienced professionals congregate, then magic happens.

[Indranil]

Amit,

I have always been for privatization and breaking of HAL's monopoly in India. GoI is well within its rights to spend taxmoney to bring up the private sector in this regard. But, the money is limited and the question is does a F-16 screwdrivergiri line help in capability-building. I contend no. Because TASL has an assembly line to build complete planes today (PC-12/Do-228 NGs). It is in the process of setting up the C-295W line, and would have rolled out its first complete helicopter by now if AW was not blacklisted. Mahindra is also has a line for building the Airvan 8/10 and will soon build the NM-5 and Airvan 18. On the other hand, F-16 potentially challenges a fledgling national capability which was miraculously and painstaking built over the past 2-3 decades, and may be squandered away. Should we as a nation incentivize it in the name of "privatization"? We have to build up the private sector and I dwelve on it later.

Now tell me something. Where do you think our bottleneck is? Is it in designers (ISRO/DRDO/ADA/NPOL) or in assembly line? I think the problem is in the assembly line manufacture because of the lack of an ecosystem, partly because of the cumbersome systems that the government organisations have in paying tier 2, 3 and 1 manufacturers.

It is both. We don't have designers and we don't have manufacturers. But if you have a design and a market for it, manufacturing capability is much easier to acquire. For example, we have learnt to manufacture state of the submarines (Scorpenes) and planes (Hawks,Su-30s) in 5-10 years. We are at least a generation away from designing such machines.

I asked a rhetorical question in my last post. "Do you think that the private Indian player who partners either LM or Saab in making the aircraft would close down the factory and infrastructure once the production run in over?" I would say they won't. Now the question I ask you is this: Do you think this hypothetical private industry partner (hypothetical because everything is still up in the air) can tweak it's production line to make the MK2 or maybe the AMCA with due handholding by ADA?

If the answer is yes, then the investment is one worth making because we would have a far more efficient production set up than the one that's present in HAL today - a situation in which the head of the organisation has to take permission for a Babu to spend more that Rs1000 cr to upgrade infrastructure!

Unfortunately, the answer is no. You can use the sheds, but not the line. The assembly line of one plane is custom built for it. That is why LM is ready for it to be shipped at whatever price it can get.

I know a couple of you have talked about HAL doing the hand holding and setting up a second assembly line in the private sector for Tejas. The question I ask you (again) is while theoretically this sounds reasonable, do you think it would be practically feasible, given the PSU mentality that pervades in HAL? I would postulate there will deep resistance from the management, afterall why would they want to help set up a competitor to their own line? But they perhaps can be taken care of, but what about the PSU unions? Recently the all India body has called for a strike to "protest the GoI's privatisation effort". Do you think the unions would keep quiet while a new production line is set up in the private sector?

I would tend to think that even if HAL is somehow cajoled, convinced or coerced to help a private sector company to set up a assembly line, there will still be deep institutional resistance within the MoD babudom itself. Look at shipbuilding. The Indian Navy desperately needs ships, the public sector yards are overstretched, and yet L&T, Pipavav shipyard and other private sector yards are starved of orders. Wasn't the deal that the public sector yards would handhold these private yards and teach them to build warships? What happened to that? Pipavav's old owners had to sell off due to the fact that they ran out of money because the over built in anticipation of Indian Navy orders which never came.

Besides, this also doesn't address the issue of a lack of good Tier 1 suppliers who can build whole sections of the plane for assembly.

Modi/Parrikar don't have silver bullet to change PSU attitudes overnight. So IMO this idea of HAL hand holding a private sector player and helping it to set up a 16 plane a year line, while simultaneously expanding its own line to 16 aircraft a year is like a nice science project. Great in theory but has little relation to real life realities.

Yes, HAL is not going to let go. But that's not because it is a public company. A private company will guard its monopoly with equal zeal. With LCA, the only privatization that we can expect is the outsourcing of major parts to the private industry. But let me tell you some other truths. The private industry is not ready to manufacture these parts yet. In some cases it is not technologically capable. In other cases setting up a facility to do so for 100 odd planes is not financially lucrative. It makes sense for Tatas and L&Ts to spend the funds elsewhere. The same goes for building parts for 100 F-16s. What you are speaking of is screwdrivergiri of SKDs or CKDs on an assembly line. That is not capability building. Instead of throwing money at an outdated assembly line because IAF can't make do with LCAs and Su-30s, place orders for 300 LCAs. Suddenly, it becomes much more logical for private companies to invest in these capability building. HAL also has no other way but to scale up to 32 airplanes per year, and outsource the manufacturing of large parts to the private sector. That is strategic capability building with same money spent. However, Parrikar has do well to find out a way to break the current nexus of suppliers to the public sector. That is an open challenge. Otherwise, where to spend the money: in 200 more LCAs or 100 more F-16s is a no-brainer to me.

This is exactly what I think this move to have a another line of planes - which would useful for the IAF because it bolsters numbers with a plane which has few peers in this region - is all about.

I am waiting for people to teach me how 100 F-16s are much better than 200 LCAs. I really do! My very limited back-of-the-envelop calculating skills show me otherwise.

I think you mentioned it, and I agree with you. In terms of military aircraft I don't think the bottleneck is in design, I think the bottleneck is in productionising the design. I think this play is about developing an entity that, hopefully, can do a better job at this than what HAL is doing currently.

I don't think - and I also never said it that way - that this new private player, after doing the production run of 100-200 airplanes will suddenly develop designers who can design a fifth generation plane. But they may develop the expertise to productionise - along with the necessary ecosystem of suppliers - a MK2 or AMCA for the matter. In my best case scenario, this hypothetical entity can manufacture the MK2 while HAL can concentrate on the AMCA when the MK1A production run is over.

With all due respect, I don't think you realize what our current design and manufacturing capabilities are. The latter is much better than the former. HAL's manufacturing capability is pretty decent if it can manufacture Su-30s/Hawks/LCHs/Dhruvs. On the other hand, IJT is a writeoff. HAL will also not have a problem to build 16 LCAs per year when the design is frozen. It cannot do it now as the internal layout is being finalized. This is the truth.

They have hooked into the global supply chain by asking international designers and manufacturers to design and build parts of their planes. It is a much needed policy change that we require in India. For example, ADA should be asked to get Boeing or LM to design CFTs for LCA.

If this happens nothing like it. But I think it's unlikely. Don't forget the examples you gave build civilian aircraft like Comac in China. Such help would be IMO less forthcoming in military planes, unless a big carrot is dangled in front of them. I would say the 100-200 aircraft run for, say the F16 - if it happens would be the biggest single order for the plane outside of the US Air Force - (ditto for the Gripen, if it is selected) is the carrot that Modi/Parrikar is dangling in front of them.

I did not think that you would be interested. But here are military planes designed indigenuously whose major parts are designed and provided by global majors and the supply chain. Sweden: Gripen. Brazil: Embraer's KC-390, Tucanos, Super Tucanos, AMX. South Korea: KAI T-50, KFX program. Turkey: Hurkus, Anka, T129. In Japan, F-2, T-4, C-1, C-2. China: too many to list. There is no carrot and stick involved. Market exists domestically, govt funds the creation and maintenance of design capability inside the country. Design consultancy is obtained and manufacturing is outsourced whenever it makes financial sense. All these come from private entities. In fact, e.g. Embraer was never profitable till it was doing license manufacturing.

To be frank, when you look at the paucity of quality aeronautical engineers in the country I don't think the focus should be the civilian side to build a brand new mid haul Indian plane. This is because of the marginal benefit of a Indian build medium haul civilian plane (with a huge percentage of foreign components, including the engine) is not much. China is doing this because they don't have the military cooperation window open to them IMO. They are trying to maximise learning so as to apply to their military sector. Rather I would think it would be better to ask Airbus or Boeing to transfer a civilian air plane production line here like the Chinese did with A320. That would train a whole generation of aeronautical engineers.

Sorry sir, You have lost me here. In the aerospace sector, design engineering and production engineering are very different. One doesn't learn to design A320s by building 320s. Not even close.

Regarding numbers of LCA. When this discussion was going on, and when I first responded, there was still uncertainty about the number of LCAs that the IAF would order, and a lot of folks lamented that with this new fighter the IAF would not order any more than the 40 it had indicated. Well now we know better. Regarding numbers of planes made and the tranches, look it all depends on how committed the government is behind this product.

If you look at it, despite it's lackadaisical attitude towards defence, even the UPA over the past 10 years supported the programme even when the clamour was for it to be shut down (three-legged cheetah and all that). I would wonder why folks here think this present government would not be behind this plane, has there been any indications to this effect?

With regards to IAF, it does not earn a single rupee on its own and operates under the aegis of the GoI. Raha has indicated that his ideal squadron strength is 42. But tell me if the GoI tells him to induct a few more squadrons of MK2 and/or future tranches of the plane and pays for them do you think Raha or his successor would oppose this saying they already have enough planes? So 120 - 200 -300 LCA will depend on how fast they can be produced, what quality they are and if they remain contemporary (with upgrades). If all these criteria is met, I don't see how it's a zero sum game between the F16 (as an example) and LCA? Can you explain that?

I have a 42 squadron-IAF with 5-6 squadrons of F-16s. With the same money, and almost the same time (5 years here or there) I can have 48 squadrons of planes with no F-16s, but more LCAs. Is the former more capable than the latter? If yes, how?

P.S. It is hong (red) bao (bag/envelop).

Really? It depends on whether you are translating from Cantonese or Mandarin or Hokkien. It also depends on where you, as a Chinese stay. Let let's just say ang bao, hong bao and ang pao are all correct. And if there's any confusion please use the term red packet!

Well, I learnt something today. Thank you. I have only received them from Mandarin speaking people.

The final point I would like to say, which I've said before, Modi/Parrikar have realised that the system as it is today is not working. I think this realisation has been within the government for a long time. Now they had two choices. One was to sit on their hands, like the UPA had done, and the other was to try and disrupt the system. I think they chose the latter and I admit it's a risky gambit - it may, or may not work - but at least they are trying to break the vicious cycle of increasing threat perception of the IAF leading to their requirement for more and better aircraft, HAL's inability to deliver on time resulting in import of gold plated foreign maal. However, if it works then we get a second production line in the private sector which may be more efficient than the one we have. Heck if they need to they may even be able to compete with the Natashas with their Savitas when selling a product!

I don't know UPA tried this for the Avro replacements as well. Almost nobody came forward. In the case of F-16s, 100 Indian assembled F-16s is not going to be cheaper than 100 American assembled F-16s, if the assembly line has to be shifted. It is not a matter of opinion.

[Manish_Sharma]

Crossposting from Bharat-US Thread :

Lockheed Martin Plans to Manufacture 30 F-16 Jets A Year In Proposed Indian Facility

Lockheed executives briefing defenseworld.net following an Indian suppliers’ meeting in Bangalore today said that they would look at starting the ‘Make-in-India’ manufacturing project with 12 aircraft a year going up to 36 at peak.

“The cost to India would reduce with every new block of aircraft manufactured and given the competitive labor costs here, you can look at a real competitively priced plane,” said Howard adding that the made-in-India F-16 would also be exported to markets in the Middle -East, Eastern Europe and Asia.