Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Boss, if you are convinced that LCA mk2 is no longer a priority for the IAF because the chief has not spoken about it in a press conference. Then I have nothing to tell you.
The cheque has to be signed by the government of India. Let them come out and make a statement about the future of the LCA mk2.
The cold hard fact is that India doesn't have any money for imports and screwdriver giri. The government is aware that the future has to be Indian designed and Indian manufactured fighters.
I would suggest that we wait to find out before start whining and moaning about mk2 not getting orders.
A moment that is 5 years away at the moment.
The cheque has to be signed by the government of India. Let them come out and make a statement about the future of the LCA mk2.
The cold hard fact is that India doesn't have any money for imports and screwdriver giri. The government is aware that the future has to be Indian designed and Indian manufactured fighters.
I would suggest that we wait to find out before start whining and moaning about mk2 not getting orders.
A moment that is 5 years away at the moment.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 459
- Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
- Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
- Contact:
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Lets be clear - ACM Chaudhary will not have to decide on the induction of Tejas Mk 2. He will retire before they start test flying. However, he definitely needs to ensure that he has IAF has evaluated all options for MCRA if the government decides to take a decision to induct it.
Either way Tejas Mk 2 will happen.
Either way Tejas Mk 2 will happen.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4277
- Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Karan M: your confidence stems from the fact that the GOI will act sensibly. I share your optimism because of the current dispensation, but only with caution. God forbid, 2024 doesn't work out the way we want it to. Then what happens?
The fact that the optimism relies on GOI's sense rather than IAF's is sad. Its not like the IAF leadership doesn't know the cost or timelines of a potential 114 MRFA. They know it better than us. In spite of that, this soft-pedalling on MK2 and doubling-down on MRFA suggests that (a) They are posturing to get something else, which reflects a trust deficit or (b) They are still hung-up with the MRFA, which reflects a lack of sense
Neither does credit to the IAF decision-makers.
Arguments like "if they see the MK2, they will like it" (maybe you didn't make this point directly but others did) are unfair to the ADA, DRDO. The IAF has a delightful platform that works (Tejas-Mk1). If after this, they need to be "shown" another working platform before committing, then it doesn't show them in good light.
The fact that the optimism relies on GOI's sense rather than IAF's is sad. Its not like the IAF leadership doesn't know the cost or timelines of a potential 114 MRFA. They know it better than us. In spite of that, this soft-pedalling on MK2 and doubling-down on MRFA suggests that (a) They are posturing to get something else, which reflects a trust deficit or (b) They are still hung-up with the MRFA, which reflects a lack of sense
Neither does credit to the IAF decision-makers.
Arguments like "if they see the MK2, they will like it" (maybe you didn't make this point directly but others did) are unfair to the ADA, DRDO. The IAF has a delightful platform that works (Tejas-Mk1). If after this, they need to be "shown" another working platform before committing, then it doesn't show them in good light.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
He can ask for 114, but he will not get 114. So it is pointless beating this dead horse. If he only asks for 36, he will get nothing. If he asks for 114, he may get 36.Barath wrote:I think the IAF under the new air chief really wants those 114 MRFA and may be willing to deprioritize, reduce, eliminate some, or soft pedal the Mk2 to get that 114 MRFA RFP.me
Even though he is repeatedly stating that the IAF wants 114 MRFA, his audience is not the media. He wants the message to be heard by the GOI. The threat scenario is now and not in 2027/28, when the Tejas Mk2 is expected to enter service. So if he gets 36 now, that is now 72 Rafales versus only 36 Rafales till the Tejas Mk2 arrives.
Unless the Govt or the IAF have figured out a way to grow money on trees, 114 MRFA will not come.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The point is that the GoI has not said no. No one formally said "there's no money for this". There is no position paper, no force structure review think tank, no public assessment
The procurement system (from RM down) finds it far easier to delay than deny..
After all, who gainsays the IAF chief who says these are needed for security. Where's "the buck stops here" sign ?
The likely message is that he wants the RFP/AoN for the MRFA issued soon, in his tenure, not years later when the Mk2 order is on the table.. (which might also help the iaf have both in their turn)
The CDS (who is well connected to goi) leaked that the tejas was to replace the mrfa, and was immediately contradicted by the iaf, some time ago, under the last chief. Reiterating the message also helps the iaf position from being flanked
The current IAF chief has said he wants aircraft that are capable of incorporating 5th gen and 6th gen technology. That's a coded statement for MRFA.
The mk2 is not a direct substitute for mrfa. However, given assumption of money constraint, it might be a option folks here and elsewhere back. Especially as part of the puzzle instead of the only solution
But as long as there's no clear ruling, the topic will come up over and again
Heck, in the case of the pilatus, even with a clear ruling, the topic was raised again and again
The procurement system (from RM down) finds it far easier to delay than deny..
After all, who gainsays the IAF chief who says these are needed for security. Where's "the buck stops here" sign ?
The likely message is that he wants the RFP/AoN for the MRFA issued soon, in his tenure, not years later when the Mk2 order is on the table.. (which might also help the iaf have both in their turn)
The CDS (who is well connected to goi) leaked that the tejas was to replace the mrfa, and was immediately contradicted by the iaf, some time ago, under the last chief. Reiterating the message also helps the iaf position from being flanked
The current IAF chief has said he wants aircraft that are capable of incorporating 5th gen and 6th gen technology. That's a coded statement for MRFA.
The mk2 is not a direct substitute for mrfa. However, given assumption of money constraint, it might be a option folks here and elsewhere back. Especially as part of the puzzle instead of the only solution
But as long as there's no clear ruling, the topic will come up over and again
Heck, in the case of the pilatus, even with a clear ruling, the topic was raised again and again
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
It is not the Govt's job to respond to what the air chief says or does not say. So whatever he says is fine, as long as it is not something that is direct disobedience i.e. I refuse to follow the orders of the President of India or the orders of this Govt. Or if the Chief says something that is in direct contradiction to the policy set out by the Govt. Forget Atmanirbhar Bharat, I only want phoren toys. I would be a rich man for the number of times this new Air Chief has used that term since he took over as Chief.
None of that has happened under this chief. Neither is he saying anything different from what his predecessors have said. If the 114 MRFA contest is still underway when the next Air Chief comes on the scene, he will also say the exact same thing.
The way the system is set up now is that the CDS will have to clear whatever the service chiefs want. They have to go through the CDS, they cannot override him. So let the Air Chief say that he wants 114 MRFA. When it goes to the CDS, he will make the final decision. But it does not stop there. Once it goes for sanction of funds, Air HQ will realize (they already know it) that there is no money for 114 MRFA. So we are back at square one now.
So this entire exercise - the IAF wants 114 MRFA - is now a futile one. Even they know 114 MRFA is not coming. When only 36 come - which will take around 5+ years from contract signature to final delivery (as in the first Rafale deal...from Sept 2016 to Jan 2022) - the squadron strength will still be alarmingly low.
Keep bringing it up. It will not change the fact that there is no money for 114 MRFA.
None of that has happened under this chief. Neither is he saying anything different from what his predecessors have said. If the 114 MRFA contest is still underway when the next Air Chief comes on the scene, he will also say the exact same thing.
The way the system is set up now is that the CDS will have to clear whatever the service chiefs want. They have to go through the CDS, they cannot override him. So let the Air Chief say that he wants 114 MRFA. When it goes to the CDS, he will make the final decision. But it does not stop there. Once it goes for sanction of funds, Air HQ will realize (they already know it) that there is no money for 114 MRFA. So we are back at square one now.
So this entire exercise - the IAF wants 114 MRFA - is now a futile one. Even they know 114 MRFA is not coming. When only 36 come - which will take around 5+ years from contract signature to final delivery (as in the first Rafale deal...from Sept 2016 to Jan 2022) - the squadron strength will still be alarmingly low.
So let it come up again and again and again and again and again.Barath wrote:But as long as there's no clear ruling, the topic will come up over and again
Heck, in the case of the pilatus, even with a clear ruling, the topic was raised again and again
Keep bringing it up. It will not change the fact that there is no money for 114 MRFA.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Well, I am guessing the Air Chief has also read reports of the government exceeding their tax collection targets and angling for substantial allocation in the next budget.Rakesh wrote:So let it come up again and again and again and again and again.Barath wrote:But as long as there's no clear ruling, the topic will come up over and again
Heck, in the case of the pilatus, even with a clear ruling, the topic was raised again and again
Keep bringing it up. It will not change the fact that there is no money for 114 MRFA.
Also, the budgetary allocation for Tejas Mk2 won't happen until 2025-26, but they will be able to sign for foreign maal this or early next year!
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
I am reasonably sanguine the current Govt will return in 2024. But even that aside just take a, look at the MMRCA. Did UPA order it? Unfortunately for the IAF even if they were to return, they'd be full blown into blowing scarce cash on sops and corruption, leaving little for military modernisation at such a scale. A mere 36 Rafale cost us 9+ Billion $. How much would 114 cost, that too with transfer of tech royalties and setting up local production facilities? It will be prohibitively expensive.Prem Kumar wrote:Karan M: your confidence stems from the fact that the GOI will act sensibly. I share your optimism because of the current dispensation, but only with caution. God forbid, 2024 doesn't work out the way we want it to. Then what happens?
The fact that the optimism relies on GOI's sense rather than IAF's is sad. Its not like the IAF leadership doesn't know the cost or timelines of a potential 114 MRFA. They know it better than us. In spite of that, this soft-pedalling on MK2 and doubling-down on MRFA suggests that (a) They are posturing to get something else, which reflects a trust deficit or (b) They are still hung-up with the MRFA, which reflects a lack of sense
Neither does credit to the IAF decision-makers.
Arguments like "if they see the MK2, they will like it" (maybe you didn't make this point directly but others did) are unfair to the ADA, DRDO. The IAF has a delightful platform that works (Tejas-Mk1). If after this, they need to be "shown" another working platform before committing, then it doesn't show them in good light.
The IAF sees the MWF as a risk. Its a TBD aircraft and the Mk1A is yet to be delivered. So they'll obviously go for the ready platform. Its just how the forces are hard wired. Remember their mandate is to defend the state first and foremost and industrial policy is an adjunct. I disagree with them on this because imports are fundamentally unreliable so whether they like it or not industrial policy is now key to their warfighting potential.
However before we castigate them, we have to remember there were those in the IAF who asked for the MWF. Also nor are they unique - the IDFAF actually lobbied for the cancellation of the Lavi over cheaper, "mature" F-16s and ended up crippling Israels aerospace ambitions.
Overall, here's what I think will occur. The Mk1A will prove itself. And the MWF if it flies on time will go a long way in tipomg the IAFs hand to procure it. Yes, it's "unfair", a desi product has to jump through hoops but combat aviation is the most demanding there is with no significant compromises in technological and operational requirements, so it is what it is.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Barath wrote:@pratyush - you are mistaken. Single engine fighters are not banned. LCA Mk1A import is banned. Not even all light combat aircraft
https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage ... ID=1644570
A single engine fighter via MRFA would be not LCA Mk1A, not a light combat aircraft, and one made in India via MRFA would be just like submarines made in India, (except that it isn't on the list)
--------------------------------------------------
Back in 2018(But only if it met IAF expectations)We’re looking at 12 squadrons of the Light Combat Aircraft Mk.2, Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa said today at an air power conference in India’s capital, confirming months of reports suggesting the IAF was looking for over 200 of the fighters.
Back in 2019Even as late as ep 2021 RKS Bhadauria talked about 170 Mk 2IAF has told the government that it is “committed to buying” another 10 Squadrons of Tejas Mark-II (each squadron has 16-18 fighters) and 36 Advance Medium Combat (AMCA) fighters.
And now you have indirect references (?) to 7 squadrons, and omission of Tejas Mk2 by the new Air ChiefI think the IAF under the new air chief really wants those 114 MRFA and may be willing to deprioritize, reduce, eliminate some, or soft pedal the Mk2 to get that 114 MRFA RFP.meThe projected induction of 7 squadrons of Tejas Mk2 as mentioned by the IAF chief is a welcome step.
Excellent points and sadly they have been ignored.
As the MRFA vs no MRFA debate rages subtly the IAF is killing the MK.2 in another way- whittling down the requirements has negative implications for planning production capacity and amortising costs. They are creating another scenario where the LCA Mk.2 will be considered late and expensive.
I remember tracking the Arjun saga and the DRDO asking for a minimum of 500 units so they could cut the unit price in half and localise spares. What did the IA do? Ordered a mere 124 then cited high costs as a reason to order more T90s and lo and behold a few years later the Mk.1 Arjuns were in dire straits thanks to a lack of spares.
For as long as this MRFA nonsense goes on there won't be the attention or provisioning for the LCA MK.2 that it deserves. In just a few years it's projected fleet has been cut by 50% without even a penny being handed over, where will we be in 5 years time?
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Its not a bazaar to bargain nor fighter planes are baingan.Rakesh wrote:He can ask for 114, but he will not get 114. So it is pointless beating this dead horse. If he only asks for 36, he will get nothing. If he asks for 114, he may get 36.Barath wrote:I think the IAF under the new air chief really wants those 114 MRFA and may be willing to deprioritize, reduce, eliminate some, or soft pedal the Mk2 to get that 114 MRFA RFP.me
Even though he is repeatedly stating that the IAF wants 114 MRFA, his audience is not the media. He wants the message to be heard by the GOI. The threat scenario is now and not in 2027/28, when the Tejas Mk2 is expected to enter service. So if he gets 36 now, that is now 72 Rafales versus only 36 Rafales till the Tejas Mk2 arrives.
Unless the Govt or the IAF have figured out a way to grow money on trees, 114 MRFA will not come.
This is nautanki of first order and will hopefully be addressed at appropriate time in the appropriate manner.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
KSingh all will be well in the end. That's all we can hope.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Besides the fact that the current Air Chief Marshal will not be around when a contract will be signed for MWF, the window to acquire an MRFA is painfully short. If MWF is ready before the deal is inked, that will automatically eliminate the need for MRFA. We are about 5 years away from that time. Given the political situation, nothing will be done by 2024. So the window shortens to 2-3 years. That is why it makes sense to wait for MWF, but hedge for a delay by ordering 36 more Rafales.
As we know from the previous MRCA contest, it will cost more man hours and cash per aircraft for "TOT" and subsequent build in India. If the extra Rafales are coming at all, they need to be ordered before the end of 2022. Otherwise the window will close and election fever will drown out all decision making.
That is why there is so much clamor for MRFA right now. It is now or never.
As we know from the previous MRCA contest, it will cost more man hours and cash per aircraft for "TOT" and subsequent build in India. If the extra Rafales are coming at all, they need to be ordered before the end of 2022. Otherwise the window will close and election fever will drown out all decision making.
That is why there is so much clamor for MRFA right now. It is now or never.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 125
- Joined: 19 Jun 2021 09:15
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
2018:
We’re looking at 12 squadrons of the Light Combat Aircraft Mk.2, Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa said today at an air power conference in India’s capital, confirming months of reports suggesting the IAF was looking for over 200 of the fighters.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/looking ... -confirms/
2019:
IAF has told the government that it is “committed to buying” another 10 Squadrons of Tejas Mark-II (each squadron has 16-18 fighters) and 36 Advance Medium Combat (AMCA) fighters.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... R12zI.html
2020:
Air Chief Marshal RK Bhadauria in talks with Indian media has confirmed that Indian Air Force (IAF) plans to procure at least 6 Squadrons of upcoming Medium Weight Fighter (MWF)...
https://idrw.org/iaf-commits-for-100-mw ... r-planned/
We’re looking at 12 squadrons of the Light Combat Aircraft Mk.2, Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa said today at an air power conference in India’s capital, confirming months of reports suggesting the IAF was looking for over 200 of the fighters.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/looking ... -confirms/
2019:
IAF has told the government that it is “committed to buying” another 10 Squadrons of Tejas Mark-II (each squadron has 16-18 fighters) and 36 Advance Medium Combat (AMCA) fighters.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... R12zI.html
2020:
Air Chief Marshal RK Bhadauria in talks with Indian media has confirmed that Indian Air Force (IAF) plans to procure at least 6 Squadrons of upcoming Medium Weight Fighter (MWF)...
https://idrw.org/iaf-commits-for-100-mw ... r-planned/
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 679
- Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
K Singh ji, small point from my side...KSingh wrote: We would be around 35 fighter squadrons by the next decade in view of the phasing out of old aircraft and induction of new aircraft: IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal VR Chaudhari
https://twitter.com/ani/status/1445289270055301123?s=21
These aren’t basic statements- these are the words of the senior most IAF officer.
35 squadrons is their assessment by the mid 2030s which means there’s no room for LCA MK.2
I agree 6 squadrons of AMCA are unlikely by mid-2030s but used that as their future force plan.
Taking CAS at his word it looks like in their mind:
6 LCA MK.1/1A
15 SU-30
8 Rafale/MRFA
2 AMCA
4 Mirage 2000UPG/MIG-29UP/Jaguar Darin 3
So again, 0 room for even 1-2 squadrons of LCA MK.2.
If LCA MK.2 was on the cards we could expect 4-5 squadrons of it in service come the mid-2030s so added on top of the above there would be no need to say the IAF strength would only be 35 by the mid-2030s
Again, there’s a reason this CAS mentions MRFA to LCA MM.2 on a 4:1 ratio
In the same interview/press conference in which Chief said we will reach 35 squadrons by mid-2030s, he also said that MIG29, Mirage 2000s and Jaguars will retire by then...
Your assumption here is wrong... Actual numbers will be as follows:-
6 Tejas Mk1/1A
13 Su30
2 Rafale
6 MRFA
2 AMCA Mk1
That is 29 squadrons...
The balance 6 squadrons will be yet-to-be-retired MIG29, Mirage 2000s and Jaguars... These will be progressively replaced by Tejas Mk2...
Even if not by 2035, IAF need 42 squadrons by mid-2040s atleast... That is not possible with 6 MRFA and 6 AMCA...
IAF will need 8 Tejas Mk2 squadrons to achieve it...
----
I only see two scenarios in future--->
1) MRFA is cancelled... 36-72 off-the-shelf Rafales... Tejas Mk2 fast-tracked and 10-12 squadrons ordered...
2) MRFA goes ahead... Tejas Mk2 orders delayed and productions runs at 16 per year, as Tejas Mk1A... 8 squadrons ordered...
Either ways, Tejas Mk2 will have to happen...
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The IAF needs to grow to a 150 + squadron combat fleet by 2050. If it has to have a chance to deal with a PRC that is capable of fighting with the Americans on equal terms.
They have to start thinking in terms of building such a force. The best way to achieve that force is through a combination of MWF, ORCA, and AMCA coupled with unmanned combat aircraft.
For SU 30 replacement, we can have a joint venture program with another nation with similar requirements.
Outright purchase of foreign fighters will not really be helpful in building this force. Because of the economic reasons.
They have to start thinking in terms of building such a force. The best way to achieve that force is through a combination of MWF, ORCA, and AMCA coupled with unmanned combat aircraft.
For SU 30 replacement, we can have a joint venture program with another nation with similar requirements.
Outright purchase of foreign fighters will not really be helpful in building this force. Because of the economic reasons.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Sir, that must surely be a typo. Did you mean 50+ squadron combat fleet?Pratyush wrote:The IAF needs to grow to a 150 + squadron combat fleet by 2050. ...
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
I mean 150 and not 50.
50 squadrons will be insufficient to deal with a PRC that is capable of fighting with the Americans on an equal footing.
Especially when IAF is faced with a two front situation.
This is a conversation that has to be started right now.
50 squadrons will be insufficient to deal with a PRC that is capable of fighting with the Americans on an equal footing.
Especially when IAF is faced with a two front situation.
This is a conversation that has to be started right now.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Painful to see, truly painful as I remember the jubilation on this forum when Dhanoa had proposed 201 LCA MK.2 (I believe a t-shirt design with 201 was created here?)RishiChatterjee wrote:2018:
We’re looking at 12 squadrons of the Light Combat Aircraft Mk.2, Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa said today at an air power conference in India’s capital, confirming months of reports suggesting the IAF was looking for over 200 of the fighters.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/looking ... -confirms/
2019:
IAF has told the government that it is “committed to buying” another 10 Squadrons of Tejas Mark-II (each squadron has 16-18 fighters) and 36 Advance Medium Combat (AMCA) fighters.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... R12zI.html
2020:
Air Chief Marshal RK Bhadauria in talks with Indian media has confirmed that Indian Air Force (IAF) plans to procure at least 6 Squadrons of upcoming Medium Weight Fighter (MWF)...
https://idrw.org/iaf-commits-for-100-mw ... r-planned/
It's going to keep dwindling down like this as the IAF gets more an more desperate to get their 114 MRFAs.
We outsiders know the LCA Mk.2 is the best option for industry and to get their SQN numbers up but it's irrelevant what we think, the IAF senior leadership has been utterly fixated on 100+ MMRCA/MRFA for the best part of 25 years now and they are not dropping this demand- even if it costs the LCA Mk.2 project.
Of course we can all see how this play out- there's no money for the MRFA so it won't ever see the light of day but they won't concede this point for a good many years to come meanwhile the MK.2 project stagnates and delays mount. Meanwhile the legacy fleet (jags/MiG-29s/Mirages) age and start to become more and more of a liability so have to be phased out. As a result SQN strength starts to tank again.
Sound familiar? This is the EXACT same scenario that has played out in the 00s/10s vis a vis Tejas,MMRCA and MiG-21/23/27. So we know this is plausible and the likely scenario.
An additional 36-54 Rafales off the shelf and 10-12 SQNs of LCA Mk.2 would effectively address all of the IAF's late 2020s-2030s woes but they seemingly only have eyes for the 114 MRFA as their 'silver bullet'.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
IAF chief made two public statements recently wherein he did not even mentioned LCA Mk2 and talked about AMCA and so on. I refuse to believed that is not deliberate. I also refuse to believe he is alone in this. One can never ruler about MoD baboons doing some dramas through IAF chief.
LAC Mk2 is going to come out next year or so and as per the reports the ADA is going to ask for our PM to be personally visit and name the LCA Mk2. Tejas was named by ABV. Now MN may name LCA Mk2 when it gets rolled out. Our PM will take credit ( quite justifiably) for the LCA Mk2 roll out.
No IAF head can bypass LCA MK2 after that.
LAC Mk2 is going to come out next year or so and as per the reports the ADA is going to ask for our PM to be personally visit and name the LCA Mk2. Tejas was named by ABV. Now MN may name LCA Mk2 when it gets rolled out. Our PM will take credit ( quite justifiably) for the LCA Mk2 roll out.
No IAF head can bypass LCA MK2 after that.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
India’s Tejas Mk2 combat jet on track, officials say
The Tejas Mk2 has yet to take to the air, but it is being vaunted as the future of the Indian Air Force.
According to a report in Air Power Asia, the 4.5-generation combat jet will probably be flight tested in 2023, but it is already making waves.
New IAF Chief, Air Chief Marshal VR Chaudhari, stated recently that 7 squadrons of Tejas Mk2 are projected for induction in the coming years while discussing the future roadmap of the Indian Air Force’s modernization plan.
:
:
:
:
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
There is certainly something going on behind the scenes because the mood has turned very sour to the MK.2 all of a sudden despite the fact that we can track that the commitment levels have been dropping severely even in the last 2 years (12 squadrons spoken about in 2018, it’s 6/7 today)Yagnasri wrote:IAF chief made two public statements recently wherein he did not even mentioned LCA Mk2 and talked about AMCA and so on. I refuse to believed that is not deliberate. I also refuse to believe he is alone in this. One can never ruler about MoD baboons doing some dramas through IAF chief.
LAC Mk2 is going to come out next year or so and as per the reports the ADA is going to ask for our PM to be personally visit and name the LCA Mk2. Tejas was named by ABV. Now MN may name LCA Mk2 when it gets rolled out. Our PM will take credit ( quite justifiably) for the LCA Mk2 roll out.
No IAF head can bypass LCA MK2 after that.
I sincerely hope Modi does attend such a ceremony and put such positive light on the project but I think the Tejas experience has demonstrated that even with such attention things can go off the rails very quickly. Without Parrikar LCA orders would be stuck at 16+16+8 today. Modi isn’t going to personally monitor the MK.2 project nor does the Defence minister seem particularly invested personally in it so if it’s left to the IAF we can see where this will go….
All eyes on ADA now. If they can do their jobs they can create quite a headache for the MRFA lobby.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Been in super lurker mode for years, but miss the old times of old timers bashing the posters to quality posts. Off late too much of rhona dhona with signal to noise ratio being poor.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
If posters can (mis)interpret lack of repeated mention of MK2/ MWF, then interpretation in the reverse direction is also kosher. IAF has never been content with baseline version what we now call as MK1. What in 2018 they refer as Mark-II can also be seen as 5 squadrons of Mk1A plus 7 squadrons of MK2/ MWF (per recent utterance of new ACM).RishiChatterjee wrote:2018:
We’re looking at 12 squadrons of the Light Combat Aircraft Mk.2, Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa said today at an air power conference in India’s capital, confirming months of reports suggesting the IAF was looking for over 200 of the fighters.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/looking ... -confirms/
2019:
IAF has told the government that it is “committed to buying” another 10 Squadrons of Tejas Mark-II (each squadron has 16-18 fighters) and 36 Advance Medium Combat (AMCA) fighters.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... R12zI.html
2020:
Air Chief Marshal RK Bhadauria in talks with Indian media has confirmed that Indian Air Force (IAF) plans to procure at least 6 Squadrons of upcoming Medium Weight Fighter (MWF)...
https://idrw.org/iaf-commits-for-100-mw ... r-planned/
So unless there is more concrete attributions that come to light, perhaps we can save the thread for meaningful discussion on topic.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 679
- Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
^^^That is what I feel as well... We are discussing too much about something that may or may not happen...
As of now, I don't see Mk2 getting delayed... ADA and HAL seem to be on track...
If someone in IAF/MOD really want (and have the power) to sabotage the project, it can only be after most of the testing is done by ADA... And it will be only by adding additional requirements or by delaying contract-signing by couple of years...
As I said, IAF may or may not need Tejas Mk2 to get 35 squadrons by early 2030s... But IAF definitely need Tejas Mk2 to maintain 35 squadrons number beyond 2035... They do not really have an alternative...
As of now, I don't see Mk2 getting delayed... ADA and HAL seem to be on track...
If someone in IAF/MOD really want (and have the power) to sabotage the project, it can only be after most of the testing is done by ADA... And it will be only by adding additional requirements or by delaying contract-signing by couple of years...
As I said, IAF may or may not need Tejas Mk2 to get 35 squadrons by early 2030s... But IAF definitely need Tejas Mk2 to maintain 35 squadrons number beyond 2035... They do not really have an alternative...
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
If a deal with France materializes for a joint development of a <90 kn engine then maybe the plan is to go for additional mk1b squadrons? But pure speculation at this point
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
There is no Mk1B. Any new version will take longer now to be ready than the Mk2 especially if it involves an as yet nonexistent new engine.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Officially GoI did put in an RFI for 114 MRCA for 18 billion USD. That too during Mr.Parrikar's time itself. So the blame cannot squarely be with ACM. I see 2 fold problems here. One is marketing. Private firms like LM or Dassault will constantly market their products -- which means they will be in touch with the customers; they will know who holds the cards; and how to convince those who hold the cards to buy their products. I am not sure if HAL even has a domestic marketing department. The second part is R&D. R&D is part of these firms and marketing will always have inputs on what R&D should focus on.
This is a high-stakes game since a lot of money is involved. So who knows what is promised by these firms that make ACM talk about 5th and 6th gen tech in MRCA. GoI can always change the stance and say that no more MRCA, and ask IAF to work with ADA/HAL to get whatever they want in MWF and move on with it. GoI has not done that. If the parent gives mixed signals, the child will get confused. That is what is happening here.
This is a high-stakes game since a lot of money is involved. So who knows what is promised by these firms that make ACM talk about 5th and 6th gen tech in MRCA. GoI can always change the stance and say that no more MRCA, and ask IAF to work with ADA/HAL to get whatever they want in MWF and move on with it. GoI has not done that. If the parent gives mixed signals, the child will get confused. That is what is happening here.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
WRT, MRCA program, had the IAF specifically created a requirement which rules out MK2/MWF.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
F-35A got IOC in 2016 and by that time had 200 of these jets flying. Sweden developed Gripen C/D to version E that flew first in 2017. Their AF had already placed order for 60 a/c much before IOC. The IOC is not done yet, was expected initially in 2021, now pushed to 2023. And we need IOC-1/2, FOC-1/2 to get orders? If the situation is alarming at borders, it was no less dangerous in 1980s for Mirage/Jaguar/Mig 29s. Or when India signed for Su-30MKs that were only flying much later as MKIs. For IAF, though, it has to see, feel, land in Rajastan, Leh, and God forbid, at Daulat Beg Oldi in all seasons, all circumstances, and payload configurations before it will place order for LSP of 6 or 8 or whatever.
The issue here is not IOC/FOC. For Mk1 it could be argued based on the inexperience of HAL to make 4th a/c. Not any longer, and infinite testing only for desi products while ogling at competitors (who can block supplies at critical time) shows its intentions. BRF over so many years have seen posts quoting experts who asked for Mig-21 equivalent in Tejas and not a tomorrow's jet that results in delays. What happened to that argument when it is Mk1 vs Mk2? Where are the requests/demands for an alternate engine for Tejas from IAF in case of sanctions? What happened to pushing for real force multipliers like AWACS in which we are lagging even behind PAF?
The Emperor is naked and it doesn't require much to see that, courtesy Mk1 vs Mk2 and Netra-1s vs Netra-Xs.
The issue here is not IOC/FOC. For Mk1 it could be argued based on the inexperience of HAL to make 4th a/c. Not any longer, and infinite testing only for desi products while ogling at competitors (who can block supplies at critical time) shows its intentions. BRF over so many years have seen posts quoting experts who asked for Mig-21 equivalent in Tejas and not a tomorrow's jet that results in delays. What happened to that argument when it is Mk1 vs Mk2? Where are the requests/demands for an alternate engine for Tejas from IAF in case of sanctions? What happened to pushing for real force multipliers like AWACS in which we are lagging even behind PAF?
The Emperor is naked and it doesn't require much to see that, courtesy Mk1 vs Mk2 and Netra-1s vs Netra-Xs.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
This is the fundamental issue- the system is designed for imports. Look at the number of waivers the armed forces give imported products but IDDM products have to jump through seemingly endless hoops. Didn’t the IA give LUH IOC after demanding extra trails to the IAF only for them to demand more trails this year? We all know about the story of Arjun being made to drive scores of miles in reverse gear, it’s not like the stuff that India buys is top notch either- the T90/Su-30MKI are plagued by issues.basant wrote:F-35A got IOC in 2016 and by that time had 200 of these jets flying. Sweden developed Gripen C/D to version E that flew first in 2017. Their AF had already placed order for 60 a/c much before IOC. The IOC is not done yet, was expected initially in 2021, now pushed to 2023. And we need IOC-1/2, FOC-1/2 to get orders? If the situation is alarming at borders, it was no less dangerous in 1980s for Mirage/Jaguar/Mig 29s. Or when India signed for Su-30MKs that were only flying much later as MKIs. For IAF, though, it has to see, feel, land in Rajastan, Leh, and God forbid, at Daulat Beg Oldi in all seasons, all circumstances, and payload configurations before it will place order for LSP of 6 or 8 or whatever.
The issue here is not IOC/FOC. For Mk1 it could be argued based on the inexperience of HAL to make 4th a/c. Not any longer, and infinite testing only for desi products while ogling at competitors (who can block supplies at critical time) shows its intentions. BRF over so many years have seen posts quoting experts who asked for Mig-21 equivalent in Tejas and not a tomorrow's jet that results in delays. What happened to that argument when it is Mk1 vs Mk2? Where are the requests/demands for an alternate engine for Tejas from IAF in case of sanctions? What happened to pushing for real force multipliers like AWACS in which we are lagging even behind PAF?
The Emperor is naked and it doesn't require much to see that, courtesy Mk1 vs Mk2 and Netra-1s vs Netra-Xs.
I don’t remember the AH-64E ever doing trails in Leh or ATHOS conducting local trails but they are ready to kill ATAGS in favour of it.
Much easier to read off paper specs from glossy brochures of foreign OEMs then certify and verify domestic products- that requires a very different mindset/capabilities that the Indian armed forces perhaps are lacking.
There’s any number of ways they can impede the MK.2 going forward
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
You can think of it like this.nachiket wrote:There is no Mk1B. Any new version will take longer now to be ready than the Mk2 especially if it involves an as yet nonexistent new engine.
Mk1A = elta 2052 [1st 20 ]
MK1B = uttam radar [last 53 planes] (maybe integrate meteor etc later)
You can give it different names eg Mk1A block 10 & 20 . But we already have been told that total order for these 2 configs is 73, and these two separate configs will come in. There is no point in discussing yet another config before Mk2.
https://infotonline.com/53-tejas-mk1a-t ... esa-radar/
Last edited by Barath on 03 Nov 2021 20:46, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Sorry if this has been answered earlier, but is there a definitive timeline provided for transitioning from the Elta 2052 to the Uttam on the Tejas?
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Not a definitive timeline per se, but there is a statement that (after the 10 trainers), the 1st 20 Mk1A will have Elta 2052 and the rest 53 will have Uttambrar_w wrote:Sorry if this has been answered earlier, but is there a definitive timeline provided for transitioning from the Elta 2052 to the Uttam on the Tejas?
https://infotonline.com/53-tejas-mk1a-t ... esa-radar/
You can reverse engineer this to a timeline based on expected deliveries per year.
https://idrw.org/as-the-tejas-mk1a-prog ... e-details/
If you go by 1st 2 Mk1A by March 2024, Next 8 by March 2025, ramp up to approx 21 (max 24) planes per year by 25-26 and production end by 2029, that would place the Uttam planes being delivered at latter half of ~2026-2027. Maybe allowing more time for the first Uttam config or unexpected delays.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Thanks. Hopefully, as they begin introducing it they retrofit the older aircraft and consolidate down to just one radar. Much cheaper and efficient to upgrade and sustain.Barath wrote:
If you go by 1st 2 Mk1A by March 2024, Next 8 by March 2025, ramp up to approx 21 (max 24) planes per year by 25-26 and production end by 2029, that would place the Uttam planes being delivered at latter half of ~2026-2027. Maybe allowing more time for the first Uttam config or unexpected delays.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Ignoring existential questions regarding the MK.2 for a while, I like to see that they are learning their lessons from the MK.1 project:
we know how the Indian forces make Indian products jump through hoops, are the IAF really going to order the LCA Mk.2 2 years after its first flight (2025) so it can be ready for 2028 (36 months needed for delivery is the standard for all OEMs)? When have Indian users committed so early to ANY Indian product? Look at the LUH/LCH debacles- even after IOC (and even LSP production) they've not placed orders for even 1 unit 4 years after LSP begun.
Taking examples form other projects, even if they have a 6 SQN requirement they'll order 16 LSP, wait 3-4 years then order another batch. They'll be lucky to have 2-3 SQNs in service by 2035 even if production is ready in 2028-9.
And this confirms what I thought was the case- Mk.2 will enter production as MK.1A ends (around 2028-9) but how exactly are we expecting that to be realised?MWF will have its first flight by 2023 and will be followed by 3 more jets which will see a move from IOC configuration to FOC configuration with each aircraft configurations. ADA is skipping TD (Technological Demonstrator ) and PV (Prototype Vehicle ) Stage for the MWF Program which will allow ADA and HAL to directly move to the production stage from its first flight in less than 5 years.
we know how the Indian forces make Indian products jump through hoops, are the IAF really going to order the LCA Mk.2 2 years after its first flight (2025) so it can be ready for 2028 (36 months needed for delivery is the standard for all OEMs)? When have Indian users committed so early to ANY Indian product? Look at the LUH/LCH debacles- even after IOC (and even LSP production) they've not placed orders for even 1 unit 4 years after LSP begun.
Taking examples form other projects, even if they have a 6 SQN requirement they'll order 16 LSP, wait 3-4 years then order another batch. They'll be lucky to have 2-3 SQNs in service by 2035 even if production is ready in 2028-9.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The DAC and the CCS are the responsible parties. Not the service chief or the CDS. And it is the job of those folks at the DAC/CCS to decide what can be done for the security of the country given the X threats, Y money, and a sequence of priorities. And if there are no adults in the room to define these, you cannot only blame the CDS or the service chiefs (except in their shared capacity as members of the DAC). The MRFA after all is the natural consequence of the request raised in 2001 post Kargil, a request that was formalized in the MMRCA, and is still officially relevant as the RFI for MRFA/MMRCA 2.0 and followup is still valid. Unless there is a formal structure to prioritize and evaluate the priorities, threats and approximate budgetary demands, this will recur. Or if there is a formal stricture. ie decision passed down. (eg Pilatus). As it is the default lies with the existing process (ie post RFI actions, SP) and thus with the Air Chief ask, unless action is taken. the action the ACM would want taken is the next step - the issue of the MRFA RFP, which pushes the process along. While letting the process lie dormant is the current state of things and does not help.Rakesh wrote:The way the system is set up now is that the CDS will have to clear whatever the service chiefs want.
The window for the MRFA RFP is ideally now (from the perspective of the IAF), when there is some money come in, Mk2 has not put its ask on the table, and justification is easier. Is it the right decision for the country ? Without formal structure or formal strictures, all we have is opinions.
When the time comes for Mk2, one would hope for a speedy decision and funding, not the current approach. And believe me, there will be challenging questions asked at time of Mk2. Eg a humongous cost for ToT and build G 414 in India [or not'] (the analogous ask contributed to the delay of the Mk1A). Investment in ramp-up money for the supply chain and long lead items. If the order clearance for Mk2 would be for the entire set or in batches. @KSinghs general point is relevant.
A DAC/CCS which is responsive, timely and decisive now in the matter of the MRFA and priorities, is one that could be well trusted in to be responsive, timely and decisive when the Mk2 decision rolls around.
Defence capabilities after all, do not lie only in the design or manufacturing base in the country, but also in the system that allows for transparent, agile and decisive prioritization, planning , procurement and funding
Last edited by Barath on 04 Nov 2021 13:41, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
This is a classic response that succinctly highlights the Indian procurement policy. Armed forces say we have no authority to buy anything, that rests with the civilians and wash their hands of the affair and point to CCS/DAC etc. The ministry will say, oh we will not order anything until armed forces sign off on it. So the armed forces merrily get to do the dance of cutting and pasting top features from competitive products to create an unobtanium GSQR. Then to cover their behinds, they get to make the desi product run the gamut of summer, autumn, winter, spring, rainy, cloudy, sea level , troposhpere, endosphere, summer solstice type trials. Then enters the middleman , who then smooths the way by means of justification of an emergency purchase or critical need not currently proven by desi product ( which by the way was held up in trials) that allows foreign product to be purchased. Conveniently these products do not have to go through the same rigorous trials, reasons being given on this very forum include “these are proven not developmental products” , “established pedigree” etc. etc. On pointing out that Su MKI was a developmental product that was bought, there are only crickets that are heard.
The money involved is far too much for anyone to disturb the status quo.
The money involved is far too much for anyone to disturb the status quo.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 543
- Joined: 27 Mar 2019 18:15
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
My guess is IAF waiting for Mk2 prototype/TD to start flying before they commit to anything. Of course in between if foreign maal is approved they won't say no. They can always claim HAL/ADA don't always deliver as it is a new platform blah blah. For IAF, HAL/ADA are just another company/SI like foreign ones except no bakshish coming in this lane. Bhaduria sir had volunteered in the Tejas development so naturally he was gung-ho about Mk2 but there are plenty of others who would want to thumb down their noses at Mk2.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
That is the old system. The CDS now gives his okay and then CCS and DAC come later. When the CDS last year spoke on the wisdom of acquiring a third aircraft carrier, it was the Navy that countered it. See below...Barath wrote:The DAC and the CCS are the responsible parties. Not the service chief or the CDS. And it is the job of those folks at the DAC/CCS to decide what can be done for the security of the country given the X threats, Y money, and a sequence of priorities. And if there are no adults in the room to define these, you cannot only blame the CDS or the service chiefs (except in their shared capacity as members of the DAC).
Indian Navy will push ahead with plan for 3rd aircraft carrier despite CDS’ reservations
https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/up-f ... 2020-12-11
The three services have to make their requirements known to the CDS. The CDS - in consultation with the service chiefs and looking at the budget - will make the recommendations to the DAC and the CCS. Just because they make the recommendation, that is no guarantee that it is going to happen. Now the Navy could over the CDS' head, but it will go nowhere. This Govt will not deviate from the process.The Indian Navy’s planned acquisition of a third Indigenous Aircraft Carrier (IAC-2) is at risk of running aground. On December 3, during the annual navy press conference held in New Delhi, Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Karambir Singh, iterated the Navy’s determination to acquire IAC-2. But the first Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Bipin Rawat, one of whose primary tasks is to prioritise acquisitions in the three armed forces, has cited budget constraints.
At his first media interaction in February, after taking over as CDS in December 2019, Gen. Rawat had asked the navy to re-evaluate priorities and hinted that if they pushed for the IAC-2, they would have to forgo the nuclear powered attack submarines (SSNs), another service priority.
Please remember, it was the previous navy chief - Admiral Sunil Lanba - that said that there are NO budgetary constraints to inducting 57 carrier borne naval fighters. Then from 57 it went down to 36 and then down to 35. Where did the money go?
Wish lists do not necessarily translate into reality. What happened to 126 MMRCA? Why only 36? Why did AK Antony say in Feb 2014, "That there is no money in this year's budget to acquire 126 MMRCA. Perhaps in next year's budget." Despite Congress claim that the deal with Dassault was 95% complete? One would assume, that when the Congress said 95% complete....the funds are secured. Where did the money go then?
From where is the Govt going to cough up the cash for $25 billion - at minimum - to acquire 114 MRFA? One can argue that the payment can be stretched out over a decade or more (over the life of the contract). But still, that is a significant chunk of annual CAPEX that the IAF will have to allocate each year for x number of years. Is 114 MRFA the only modernization that the IAF has to do? Obviously not! There are tankers, AEW & AWACS, missiles, precision guided munitions, aircraft upgrades, airfield modernization, etc, etc, etc. How are you going to pay for all this, when a massive chunk of your annual CAPEX is being eaten every year up by 114 MRFA?
Which of these OEMs - including my philanthropic friends from La France - is going to give 114 MRFAs to the Indian Air Force at cost or do a buy-now-and-pay-later scheme? And the Navy has thrown a spanner into the works by tying its purchase of naval carrier borne fighters to whatever fighter the IAF plans to acquire in the 114 MRFA contest. The navy can readily argue if you got money to fund 114 MRFA, then you can easily afford 35+ naval fighters as well. So from $25 billion - at minimum - the cost will now jump even higher to upwards of $30 billion. From where do you think the Govt is going to fund this? Which bank does the Govt have with $30 billion just lying around?
Assuming the Govt miraculously finds the funds for this massive purchase, you think the opposition in Parliament is going to let a $30+ billion deal just slide under the rug and act like nothing happened? They will rake the Govt over the coals for this. Every OEM that lost will jump in the fray citing irregularities in the deal. It will be one massive and royal mess. No govt in India will touch this deal with a hundred foot pole.
This current govt will likely win in 2024. But what about 2029? 2034? 2039? 2044? How long do you think the BJP will keep on winning? The nature of politics is such that no one party can survive in power forever. Assuming a deal for 114 MRFA is signed post 2024. What is the guarantee that the next govt will not scrap it and throw it out? If you find that hard to believe, what do you think happened when 126 MMRCA got converted into 36 MMRCA? The Rafale Scam lives in RaGa's head and when he comes in as PM, rest assured he will do everything to undermine the MRFA deal.
So when 114 MRFA do not come, what do you think the IAF will do? Sit and wait for the mythical unicorn to arrive? They will have to fall back on what is available. There are multiple options here;
1) order more aircraft that are presently in service i.e. do a follow on deal for 36 more Rafales
2) commence the Super Sukhoi upgrade
3) increase the serviceability of the aircraft currently in service
4) Continue with the development of the Tejas Mk2 and induct as quickly as time permits (which the IAF presently has little role in). This is ADA's baby. From there, it will move to HAL and finally a HAL test pilot will do the initial first flight.
5) order a couple more Tejas Mk1A units till the Mk2 comes on board
I am amazed as to how people in this thread are getting this much takleef over what the Air Chief said (I WANT 114 MRFA) and what he did not say (Tejas Mk2). Tejas Mk2 Ko Bali Chada Do, Magar Mujhe 114 MRFA Chaiye!
We want many things Barath, but that does not mean we are going to get it. Affordability is a big issue for many. It is no different with the IAF. They want 114 MRFA, but show me the money. Show me the political will to conclude such a deal.
P.S. When you reply to my post, please answer this question first. What happened to Plan B?
You remember Plan B sirjee? There is no Plan B. We want 126 MMRCAs. There is no Plan B. We want 126 MMRCA. There is no Plan B. There is no Plan B. There is No. There is. There. Oh wait. Plan B arrived!!!
Is Plan B 114 MRFA?
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Does any political party or alliance orders aircrafts for defence forces? This same bureaucracy in MoD was there or it changed suddenly ?Karan M wrote:I am reasonably sanguine the current Govt will return in 2024. But even that aside just take a, look at the MMRCA. Did UPA order it?Prem Kumar wrote:Karan M: your confidence stems from the fact that the GOI will act sensibly. I share your optimism because of the current dispensation, but only with caution. God forbid, 2024 doesn't work out the way we want it to. Then what happens?
The fact that the optimism relies on GOI's sense rather than IAF's is sad. Its not like the IAF leadership doesn't know the cost or timelines of a potential 114 MRFA. They know it better than us. In spite of that, this soft-pedalling on MK2 and doubling-down on MRFA suggests that (a) They are posturing to get something else, which reflects a trust deficit or (b) They are still hung-up with the MRFA, which reflects a lack of sense
Neither does credit to the IAF decision-makers.
Arguments like "if they see the MK2, they will like it" (maybe you didn't make this point directly but others did) are unfair to the ADA, DRDO. The IAF has a delightful platform that works (Tejas-Mk1). If after this, they need to be "shown" another working platform before committing, then it doesn't show them in good light.
Why there is no transparency regarding project roadmaps ?