Cain Marko wrote:Mongolsaar, why so suspicious? Does it have to be that the Navy, if they bail out, must obviously be because they are anti Desi products. Could it even remotely be possible that the product won't actually work for them? Imho, the reason for the Navy decision is the same reason that the IAF produced, but more relevant.... The bird is under powered. But of course my understanding of such matters is rudimentary at best, and there might actually be another better reason. But I find it rather suspicious that the one service which has been repeatedly commended even by jingos for being pro local products has suddenly grown an uncharacteristically unpatriotic bone and decided to abandon the project for flimsy reasons...
Cainji, I am sure the Navy leadership understands the implication of their "strategy": MiG-29 is beneath their standards. LCA is beneath their standards. This leaves - what? French and American Navy fighters Rafale or F/A-18, unless they are arguing for JF-17.
1. Admiral Ramdoss, fomer head of Indian Navy. Notorious anti-Indian, spends much of his time slandering India on behalf of foreign entities and commie-pakis. Apparently an enthusiast if not representative of foreign arms dealers.
2. Admiral "golf" Nadkarni, former head of Indian Navy: Spent much of his time during the LCA development, calling for its cancellation. When the LCA actually flew, came out with an article DEMANDING project cancellation, that was so bogus it should have been marked as criminal in its misleading nature.
3. Another Navy boss has been shunted out because his wife was running the Navy, not he. For relatives. By relatives.
These atrocities went on for years and years unchecked. So I think some skepticism by the public is warranted on IN decisions. LCA may not be export-ready, but the IN leadership Alumni Association certainly seems export-ready.
The I in IN stands for India. It is a fact of life that without procurement from the armed services, indigenous weapon development is doomed. So a decision to "have nothing to do with it" by one service, should be unacceptable.
IIRC, when LCA was brought out, the Prototype 5 which was the Navy version, was the most interesting and advanced, since it had several aerodynamic features that others did not have. Now the Navy says it does not meet it's requirements? Are Indian Navy ships somehow special in that the LCA cannot land or takeoff on them? Have IN ships become smaller in the past 10 years? Pilots less skilled? I don't see why. Do they have R&D projects to solve whatever special problems are encountered?
The engine is underpowered? India does not know how to make engines of suitable thrust-to-weight ratio and reliability. That is not fixed by cancelling requirements. Frankly I think the whole setup stinks. Why can't MiG and Sukhoi fighters' engines be adapted, or the LCA adapted, for a match? Ask the Admirals to lose weight and set an example for Navy pilots. Develop lighter weapons.
Meanwhile, China is coming out with aircraft carrier production, and sailing those things all round the world (OK< under tow most of the time..) They are using their own fighters, not French or American. Why does this not work only with India?
The right course of action is for the IN leadership to be invited to a private meeting with the civilian leadership, and given sailing orders. If IN leadership does not cooperate in LCA development, then it is the leadership, not the LCA, that needs to be cancelled. Maybe like the BCCI, Indian netaship could decide that IN needs Phoren Coaches to replace the present top layer?
Maybe a lot of the funds earmarked for Navy procurement should be re-directed to LCA development to solve the outstanding issues.
So yes, given the antics of past leadership, the dissatisfaction with the MiG-29 and now the LCA combine to paint a rather bad picture of IN. Maybe they need to bring back the Mysteres.