1) M2K: The weapons you mentioned were already integrated and tested by the French on other Mirages, probably the weapons package for these were not negotiated and completed before inducting the aircraft. probably they wanted to get the birds in and allow pilots to start training with them. M2K was meant to be an A2A fighter, it evolved into a multi-role later.
2) Mig-29: this was I think a panic buy... we were offered the Mig-29 way too early in its life and we lapped it up, probably our funds helped in completing the development of many aspects of the aircraft which were not ready but then we paid Soviet Era Friendship price for these in Bananas and tea and cigarettes.
Will come to SU-30 next.
Only conjectures at this point with no facts to back up the claims. If M2K was meant to be an A2A fighter for IAF how come the Matra 550 & Super 350 (which are A2A missiles) were integrated only later? What is to stop IAF from using current MK1 also to 'train' and 'familiarize' over the next few years like they did with M2K? PAF and PLAAF were as much a threat then as they are now.
Shrinivasan wrote:^^^SU-30: This was a completely different ball game altogether. The initial 18 SU-30Ks were explicitly brought over to familiarize our pilots to the Sukhois.
Again what is stopping IAF from using current MK1 also to 'train' and 'familiarize' over the next few years like they did with Su-30K?
Shrinivasan wrote:During this time, Sukhoi developed the MKI for desh. DRDO et al also developed many many components, evaluated many sub-systems from western sources like France, Israel and the UK which were then integrated onto the MKIs, some of these systems were also tested on the SU-30Ks, they were meant to be flogged and discarded (and since then returned to Russia) and served this role very well.
our $$$ was used by Sukhoi to extensively transform itself to the status it is now compared to its squalid state then.
So iterative development philosophy is applicable for foreign MIC but not for Indian one and that too on our $$$
Shrinivasan wrote:Different times, different needs, different philosophies...
Different times yes, <sarcasm on> then IAF did not have real threats to push platforms not fully exploited unlike now <sarcasm off>
Different philosophies yes, <sarcasm on> then IAF had single platform single role so asked Frenchies/ Russkies to remove X, Y, Z capabilities. <sarcasm off> Unlike now when they want everything under the sun on Tejas yet there is no word on their intended role except for phrases like replacement for Mig-21, nay Mirage 2000, nay 'abc'