Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Dec 2018 00:07

ks_sachin wrote:
fanne wrote:How would the interface allow close loop? The missile physically disassociate from the interface once it is fired (of course the first integration point is the interface that we have for 30mki and gotten for Rafael and trick it for Mirage2000). Now for mid course, the wireless communication between the missile and the plane (and its radar) has to happen for mid course correction. You will need the radar and the missile talking (i.e. integrate). That would be a closely guarded secret. Imagine if that info is public (R-77 anyone), you can then spoof the missile send a different command and misguide it. That is how a very sophisticated EW would work.
I assumed that interface is more than physical.
Why do we claim Astra has mid course correction.
Anyhow now my area of interest..just curiosity.

IR any comments?

viewtopic.php?t=6509&start=3320https:// ... start=3320

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 15 Dec 2018 00:20

Kartik wrote:
Gyan wrote:Our target should be that LCA must be better than Indian upgraded Mig21s & Chinese copy of Mig21s, Rest is bonus.
What is the point of such posts?

The Tejas is way beyond what the Bison or J-7s are capability wise, that there is no point discussing how much of an improvement it is over these types. And if you don't know what those capabilities are, then maybe you should read up first and post later.

I think Gyan reiterated the primary objective of the LCA project, and made the point that adding more and more scope to it would make it fail to meet that primary objective within the desired timeline. The project is already way late in that it should have replaced all the Mig-21s in IAF inventory by now.

I agree with Gyan on this. Develop Mk2 into mini-M2K or even mini-Rafale. But we need Mk1/ Mk1A coming off cookie cutter lines now in numbers to replace Mig-21s that have been retired or are to be retired soon.

JMHO

srin · Post by **srin** » 15 Dec 2018 00:36

From the HAL RFQ for the Tejas Mk1a radar:

Vendor shall be responsible for integration of AESA radar with third party BVR missile as per LCA Mk1A requirements.

Full text: http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/201 ... tejas.html (mods, not sure if this site is okay to be linked, given ancient history)

PS: I found the IPR section (section 12) the most interesting.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Dec 2018 01:26

in the RS TV interview, the good air marshal bring the point of source code and integration. I am surprised, it took HAL this long to issue radar of 83 LCAs. That means, 83 LCA manufacturing start is some years away. So much for 16 planes per year capability. I hope the 83 are constructed @16/year rate

nam · Post by **nam** » 15 Dec 2018 01:55

I cannot miss the fact that a fighter which was called the "3 legged", would be the first MRCA (not DPSA) to receive the latest gen radar in IAF's inventory!

Not Mirage, not the big boys SU30!

I can see the pilots wanting to join in LCA squadron just to have a go at it's radar!

Waiting for Airforce day airshow when LCA flies in.. with announcement that "it has AESA radar" to lot of envy

nam · Post by **nam** » 15 Dec 2018 02:01

fanne wrote:in the RS TV interview, the good air marshal bring the point of source code and integration. I am surprised, it took HAL this long to issue radar of 83 LCAs. That means, 83 LCA manufacturing start is some years away. So much for 16 planes per year capability. I hope the 83 are constructed @16/year rate

The first FOC SP is suppose to fly in Oct 19. So around a year/ 1.5 yr it will complete production. So on paper 2021 is when we should see MK1A coming out.

HAL must be having access to 2052 from Jag program and 8222 from IAF to put together a MK1A prototype. Experience from Jag integration should help. Now it is up to HAL how early in 19, can they bring out a prototype.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 15 Dec 2018 09:25

Israeli, European, US equipment would definitely have interface as they expect their equipment, radar to work or interface with missiles & avionics of multiple different manufacturers.

Having said that Israel has taken around one decade each to integrate its own bvr, wvr missiles to its own radars in Tejas.

Astra programs is also running prior to 1996 and got formal sanction, funds in 2004, so adequate time to interface, integrate was available.

It may not be plug & play but also would not be a black box.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 15 Dec 2018 09:27

Kakkaji wrote:
Kartik wrote:
What is the point of such posts?

The Tejas is way beyond what the Bison or J-7s are capability wise, that there is no point discussing how much of an improvement it is over these types. And if you don't know what those capabilities are, then maybe you should read up first and post later.
I think Gyan reiterated the primary objective of the LCA project, and made the point that adding more and more scope to it would make it fail to meet that primary objective within the desired timeline. The project is already way late in that it should have replaced all the Mig-21s in IAF inventory by now.

I agree with Gyan on this. Develop Mk2 into mini-M2K or even mini-Rafale. But we need Mk1/ Mk1A coming off cookie cutter lines now in numbers to replace Mig-21s that have been retired or are to be retired soon.

JMHO

Yes, that's what I want to say plus that most of the opposition is still MIG 21 variants and not 5th Gen aircraft.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 15 Dec 2018 13:01

Lalmohan wrote:JayS - avionics and weapons systems are not usually designed to be open architecture. there are a lot of reasons - security being one. but just in terms of performance - speed, weight, power consumption, etc., there is a lot of hardware and firmware optimisation before even thinking about the software. as a result, open ness and integration abilities are sacrificed due to the bespoke nature of the end product. therefore its not as simple as lashing a bunch of desktops together even if conceptually that's all you are doing

Avionics and weapons systems are being designed with open architecture for quite a while now. I think you are confusing open architecture with "openness" (as in open source) of a system. An open architecture system need not give freedom and ease of modifications to anyone but the developer. In today's world no OEM will think of making closed architecture subsystems for fighter avionics. Otherwise the cost of further modifications and development in the same system would be so much that it will quickly erode its cost competitiveness (goes for both HW and SW).

Optimisation of firmware for HW is not contradictory to requirements of modularity in the larger system, it can be accommodated within the open architecture framework as long as each module/sub-system is individually optimised. After all we are not going to install firmware (or even SW for that matter) of one radar onto other like we install Windows OS on various HW).

As far as the "openness" is concerned which can enable third party to integrate other systems with the radar, that is controlled by only API (physical or SW). If Radar OEM gives API to the third party they can do the integration with ease and at the same time Radar source code is not compromised. Having an API designed into the system and sharing it with others are two different things. Also note that with the API, the OEM can control the level of access to the source code. It can be either limited to the bare minimum interface thats required for given capability or it could allow one to access each and every functionality in the source code.

Whether a Radar is open architecture or close architecture, the interface can always be reverse engineered, as long as there is an interface. Only thing is cost and efforts increase if one has no access to API and for a closed architecture.

This is quite the same as how many commercial SW tools operate. They have a API designed for their SW. You have to buy the API license separately to be able to build own apps or integrate third party tools with this particular SW using the API. Please note I am not talking about the scripting interface that is available or user defined functionality interface that is available for the user from front end (GUI/TUI) for automation or customisation purpose. The API I am referring to link the user to the back end source code directly.

chola · Post by **chola** » 15 Dec 2018 18:44

From The Diplomat:
https://thediplomat.com/2018/12/india-s ... -aircraft/

India Selects Israeli Radar and Electronic Warfare Suite For Tejas Light Combat Aircraft

The defense deal was reportedly “quietly” concluded already in October.

By Franz-Stefan Gady
December 13, 2018

India’s state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) concluded a deal on October 26 with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) subsidiary Elta Systems for the purchase of 83 ELM-2052 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars and ELL-8222WB electronic warfare (EW) suites to be integrated with the Mark-IA Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), according to local media reports.

Elta was selected over two European defense contractors, Thales and Saab, to provide its systems to the Indian Air Force (IAF). The selection of Elta has been met with criticism by various Indian defense analysts. There is some concern that the IAF will not be able to procure the beyond-visual-range air-to-air (BVRAAM) Meteor missile for its fleet of Mark-IA LCA.

“MBDA, the European consortium that builds the Meteor, has repeatedly told the IAF that it would only fit that missile onto a fighter with a European airborne radar,” Ajaj Shukla wrote in the Business Standard earlier this week. “Choosing an Elta AESA radar for the Tejas Mark-IA, therefore, rules out the Meteor and, with it, any hope that the IAF will buy the Mark-IA in significant numbers.”

The IAF already is procuring the Meteor BVRAAM for its 36 Dassault Rafale fighter jets. Yet MBDA notified the Indian government that it would not integrate missile on any Israeli or Russian platforms.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Dec 2018 18:52

wow controversy out of nothing. When A shooklaw is here again at BR, please remind me....
We are better off with Derby (and Derby ER), order and hold it in larger number (lower cost). We will further integrate our Astra to 2052 (unlike the French offer where they will not allow anything non-French, and may ask integration cost greater than GDP of India). It is the right choice. We already use it for Jags, we have it integrated with our systems, we also use the Derby and it is economical, just as the fighter where it intends to go. I think the whole Radar+ missile deal is 1/10 the cost of the French. We need not gold plate the LCA, that will be kiss of death.

srin · Post by **srin** » 15 Dec 2018 20:23

If indeed the IAF wants Meteor for Tejas, then we'd have an RFP for radar+BVR combo. Or atleast an RFP for very long range BVR missile requiring integration with the Tejas radar. Outside of Rafale deal, I haven't seen anything to indicate IAF is going to procure Meteor. And it's too premature to finalize Meteor without deciding the price, no ?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Dec 2018 20:26

I'm not sure how accurate this is, but the Jane's article posted a while back claimed this:

In 2017 the IAF had specified that the Tejas Mk 1A fighter should be armed with both MBDA missiles as part of the service’s stipulated upgrade over the Mk 1 model that is presently being inducted into service.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 15 Dec 2018 20:36

fanne wrote:in the RS TV interview, the good air marshal bring the point of source code and integration. I am surprised, it took HAL this long to issue radar of 83 LCAs. That means, 83 LCA manufacturing start is some years away. So much for 16 planes per year capability. I hope the 83 are constructed @16/year rate

You are right about the production rate! IAF has only issued an RFP for 83 LCA so far, so HAL is doing all this on its own proactively.

nam · Post by **nam** » 15 Dec 2018 21:37

Regarding the production rates, HAL cannot complete IOC production much earlier than FOC completion. MK1A cannot come before FOC.

There is no point having 16/year rate, where IOC,FOC is only 20 jets each. The lines will just sit idle.

Will IAF order more IOC? No. FOC? Does not look like. IAF cannot sign off on MK1A becoz there is no MK1A yet.

The only way out of this is 123 firm order, irrespective of the version. GoI has to take a call and issue the firm order, with a MK1A upgrade plan wherever possible.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Dec 2018 22:01

On Meteor, the most potent A-A missile right now, very very costly, is not in service with IAF. It will be with IAF once we receive Rafale. Now that potent missile is not in service with upgraded Mirage 2000 (our next most potent fighter along with SU30MKI) which is a French plane (apparently it has not been integrated with RDY-2), OR SU30MKI or Mig 29 but it should be on a point defense fighter with limited range. Only brother in law of Arun Shourie (who was not given any mistrial position in the current NDA govt) can come with this kind of logic. Sorry to say this guy is a blot in the IA officer corp - dishonest, incompetent, liar and vengeful and dare I say sold out.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Dec 2018 22:40

What is the status of engine orders to support future production? Has one been placed or is it something HAL will tackle next now that everything else seems to be falling in place.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 15 Dec 2018 22:55

fanne wrote:On Meteor, the most potent A-A missile right now, very very costly, is not in service with IAF. It will be with IAF once we receive Rafale. Now that potent missile is not in service with upgraded Mirage 2000 (our next most potent fighter along with SU30MKI) which is a French plane (apparently it has not been integrated with RDY-2), OR SU30MKI or Mig 29 but it should be on a point defense fighter with limited range. Only brother in law of Arun Shourie (who was not given any mistrial position in the current NDA govt) can come with this kind of logic. Sorry to say this guy is a blot in the IA officer corp - dishonest, incompetent, liar and vengeful and dare I say sold out.

the creep was menaka gandhi's brother in law. He is divorced from her sister and has married again.

connected to the congi mafia via a known congi house nigger, strutting around on borrowed testimonials and preening his borrowed feathers.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 15 Dec 2018 23:40

brar_w wrote:What is the status of engine orders to support future production? Has one been placed or is it something HAL will tackle next now that everything else seems to be falling in place.

nothing is seen on this so far.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 15 Dec 2018 23:44

But weren't 99 or so f404 already ordered? Many many years ago. Or that also has to go through RFP,RFA,rfb,rfc...SEMIFINAL 1 ,SEMIFANAL2, FINAL 1, FINAL 2 FINAL 3 THEN FINALLY (FINAL N) THE ORDER IS PLACED.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Dec 2018 00:21

fanne wrote:But weren't 99 or so f404 already ordered? Many many years ago. Or that also has to go through RFP,RFA,rfb,rfc...SEMIFINAL 1 ,SEMIFANAL2, FINAL 1, FINAL 2 FINAL 3 THEN FINALLY (FINAL N) THE ORDER IS PLACED.

Those appear to have been just discussions that did not materialize into a signed contract. Based on a quick glance at GE's website, they only confirm orders for 41 engines (17+24 follow on).

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Dec 2018 01:47

Was it 12 numbers of the older version /for prototypes? F404-F2J3.

It is better to order in squadron steps.. 'cause, we might be ready with F414 integration perhaps much earlier than expected for subsequent Mk1a orders. But then, Mk1a is all geared for 404s rather 414s(Mk2)... the point being, we can cut down Mk1a numbers, if Mk2 is ready within 2022(TD/LSP). Go for Mk2 straight away for the remaining fulfillments!

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Dec 2018 02:07

Mk2 ready by 2022? I thought the IAF expects it by 2030?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Dec 2018 02:20

I meant the first flight. Isn't 2022 the timeframe set for Mk2 prototype? me culpa

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Dec 2018 02:26

Possibly but these are production orders for production MK1As so those would have to happen soon enough to support the production plan for the next many years .

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Dec 2018 10:30

brar_w wrote:I'm not sure how accurate this is, but the Jane's article posted a while back claimed this:

In 2017 the IAF had specified that the Tejas Mk 1A fighter should be armed with both MBDA missiles as part of the service’s stipulated upgrade over the Mk 1 model that is presently being inducted into service.

It’s not accurate. There has never been any such requirement in any kind of SQRs. This all started with some desi reporters being invited to MBDA premises.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Dec 2018 10:31

In other good news, LGB has been cleared for carriage on centerline pylon. I had made myself believe that this will not happen on MK1. This will add flexibility

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 16 Dec 2018 10:45

Unsure if this has been asked before. And picking it up from where Ajai Shukla states that IAF will not order Tejas in larger numbers because of lack of integration between meteor and non European radar.

What did Europeans say your will say on the question of integrating DRDO Astra with Euro radars.

If the answer is the same then everything makes more sense by the seconds passing. I.e. the route that we are going with.

We have seen the eropean resistance on the with regards to helmet and others. It's time to leave them relegated to box of 3 Elite squadrons.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Dec 2018 16:37

India Eyes Increase In Tejas Jet Fighter Production Rate

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/22271/ ... BYvLB6IYwA

India’s state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is producing around eight Tejas, a single engine multi-role aircraft, annually and the defence ministry wants it to increase the number to 18 planes per year.

"We are very confident that Tejas Mark II will be a big leap forward to fulfil the single engine fighter requirement of the forces," Defense Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said Monday, adding the government was also considering export potential of the aircraft.

The HAL is investing Rs 1,300 crore (USD 199 million) to augment the existing infrastructure so that production of Tejas can be increased to 24 aircraft per year by 2021.

HAL has recorded its highest ever turnover of over Rs. 18,000 crores (USD 2.7 billion) (provisional and unaudited) for the fiscal year 2017-18.

HAL had reported last year’s turnover as Rs. 17,605 crores (USD 2.82 billion). During the FY 2017-18, the Company has produced 40 new aircraft/helicopters and 105 new engines. The Company has also carried out overhaul of 220 aircraft/helicopters and 550 engines, HAL said in a statement Monday.

The Company has received order of 41 Advanced Light Helicopters and 8 Chetak helicopters from Indian Armed Forces in the FY 2017-18. In the other major achievements, the Company received Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) certificate for its Light Combat Helicopter (LCH), Certificate of Airworthiness for its civil variant Dornier Do-228 from DGCA, acceptance of Mirage 2000 upgrade by Air HQ after its Final Operational Clearance, first successful run of Hindustan Turbo Shaft Engine -1200 and successful test firing of BrahMos missile from Su-30 MKI etc.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) had ordered 40 Tejas Mark-1 version.

A request for proposal (RFP) was issued to HAL by the IAF two months back for the procurement of 83 Tejas of the Mark-1A version at a cost of around $7.7 billion.

Sitharaman said the government was examining how to increase the production of the LCA, adding a number of countries have shown interest in procuring the aircraft.

The defence minister's remarks came amid reports of a view in the defence establishment that Tejas was not enough to maintain IAF's combat readiness and it needed to quickly procure a fleet of foreign single engine fighters to deal with any possible security challenges facing the country in the wake of the dwindling size of its fighter fleet.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Dec 2018 16:41

So each Tejas Mk1a is $93 million?

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Dec 2018 16:45

SaiK wrote:So each Tejas Mk1a is $93 million?

First block. Each subsequent one will be cheaper as development and capital costs are amortized. For phoren parts it is better to negotiate large deals upfront to negate inflation of imports.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Dec 2018 16:57

No. Perhaps keep it at that price for sale to Baharin et al.

nam · Post by **nam** » 16 Dec 2018 17:06

I don't if that cost includes production line setup, specially with private players making fuselage.

HAL should make a deal that includes MK2 as well. There might be major differences b/w MK1 & Mk2 but the raw materials will be same. You would still need metal, composites, cable?

Raw material for 200 jets will be cheaper than 83 jets. You would still need some mk1 LRU when it goes in to maintenance.

Need to stop this 20+20 then 83, then 120. It will not reduce cost. Probably one of the reason it is costing more is the uncertainty of orders and the nonsense annual buying cycle.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 16 Dec 2018 18:11

SaiK wrote:No. Perhaps keep it at that price for sale to Bahrain et al.

At $93 Million - will it find any buyers? Keep in mind that by the time the Tejas production lines are stabilized and IAF requirements are met the F35 will be available at $80 million per bird (base price) and there will be literally hundreds of them with the lines fully amortized.

kit · Post by **kit** » 16 Dec 2018 18:42

chola wrote:From The Diplomat:
https://thediplomat.com/2018/12/india-s ... -aircraft/

India Selects Israeli Radar and Electronic Warfare Suite For Tejas Light Combat Aircraft

The defense deal was reportedly “quietly” concluded already in October.

By Franz-Stefan Gady
December 13, 2018

India’s state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) concluded a deal on October 26 with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) subsidiary Elta Systems for the purchase of 83 ELM-2052 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars and ELL-8222WB electronic warfare (EW) suites to be integrated with the Mark-IA Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), according to local media reports.

Elta was selected over two European defense contractors, Thales and Saab, to provide its systems to the Indian Air Force (IAF). The selection of Elta has been met with criticism by various Indian defense analysts. There is some concern that the IAF will not be able to procure the beyond-visual-range air-to-air (BVRAAM) Meteor missile for its fleet of Mark-IA LCA.

“MBDA, the European consortium that builds the Meteor, has repeatedly told the IAF that it would only fit that missile onto a fighter with a European airborne radar,” Ajaj Shukla wrote in the Business Standard earlier this week. “Choosing an Elta AESA radar for the Tejas Mark-IA, therefore, rules out the Meteor and, with it, any hope that the IAF will buy the Mark-IA in significant numbers.”

The IAF already is procuring the Meteor BVRAAM for its 36 Dassault Rafale fighter jets. Yet MBDA notified the Indian government that it would not integrate missile on any Israeli or Russian platforms.

Expect MBDA to come calling once Astra mark 2 comes online .. without any precondition s

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 16 Dec 2018 20:17

Vips wrote:
SaiK wrote:No. Perhaps keep it at that price for sale to Bahrain et al.
At $93 Million - will it find any buyers? Keep in mind that by the time the Tejas production lines are stabilized and IAF requirements are met the F35 will be available at $80 million per bird (base price) and there will be literally hundreds of them with the lines fully amortized.

Just a single number makes no sense. Is this just the jet, jet+pbl, jet+pbl+ammunition? Without those details there is no point in comparisons.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 16 Dec 2018 20:31

SaiK wrote:India Eyes Increase In Tejas Jet Fighter Production Rate

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/22271/ ... BYvLB6IYwA

The Company has received order of 41 Advanced Light Helicopters and 8 Chetak helicopters from Indian Armed Forces in the FY 2017-18. In the other major achievements, the Company received Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) certificate for its Light Combat Helicopter (LCH), Certificate of Airworthiness for its civil variant Dornier Do-228 from DGCA, acceptance of Mirage 2000 upgrade by Air HQ after its Final Operational Clearance, first successful run of Hindustan Turbo Shaft Engine -1200 and successful test firing of BrahMos missile from Su-30 MKI etc.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Dec 2018 22:28

Vips wrote:
SaiK wrote:No. Perhaps keep it at that price for sale to Bahrain et al.
At $93 Million - will it find any buyers? Keep in mind that by the time the Tejas production lines are stabilized and IAF requirements are met the F35 will be available at $80 million per bird (base price) and there will be literally hundreds of them with the lines fully amortized.

I agree, but this cost is just the first batch. Subsequent batches will be cheaper. No international customer is going to buy the Tejas at $93 million a piece.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Dec 2018 22:46

The T-50IQ sold (overall deal) for around $45 Million a unit or around $80 Million a unit once support and training costs were factored in (not sure whether that latter number includes weapons). The Mk1A is more capable so if HAL can market it for around $75-80 Million a unit with support, training and any infrastructure or hardware purchase required to operate the fleet then it would be quite an attractive proposition. However, they are some way away from having that..right now they are focused on getting to 16/year delivery rate and beyond this they have to focus on developing a package and service to sustain exports so it will take some time.

Unit Acquisition costs are quite a bit different, and can range anywhere from 1.5x to 3x of unit production costs so either LCA variant will not be directly competing with the F-35A or any other medium sized multi-role combat aircraft for the forceable future. Those will be much more expensive to acquire, sustain and operate compared to the LCA. Outside of the Chinese export market, the primary competitors would be the F/A-50 from KAI, and the JAS-39C and perhaps F-16's in the short term. The prospects of the MK2 in the early 2030s look better because by that time HAL would have established and refined (hopefully) a fast jet export and support process, and most of the competition (Super Hornet, Eurofighter, F-16, MiG-29.35 and Rafale) will likely not be in production.

dinesh_kimar · Post by **dinesh_kimar** » 16 Dec 2018 23:04

^ above HAL estimate of 93 million USD is totally rotten / unacceptable.

The twin engined Su-30 MKI after all, with all its "imported materials" costs 62 million USD. This is not for an "amortized production line", its made only in India.

HAL need to look deep and wide and price it competitively at 15-25 million USD per plane.

The obvious repercussion: the IAF , from whose budget the LCA is bought, will switch over to Su-30 MKI after some iterations , claiming 33 % cost saving, 3 times greater range, 2.5 times weapon stores, twin engined safety, 123 KN engine vs. imported GE engine of 83 KN, local materials, etc, etc.

As pentaiah (respected BRF poster) would have said, we cannot build Maruti spec vehicle costing more than Rolls Royce, we have to be sensible.

I'm all for supporting our MIC at slight cost disadvantage, but this is suicide. We cannot fight wars at such steep costs. (its cheaper to buy an F-35 and still save 19 million USD)

HAL/DRDo have to pls wake up from deep slumber, and look at a benchmark pricing per item.

Eg. If the GE-404 costs 12 million USD pls make necessary changes for SNECMA.

If composites are imported from uber specialist firms in Germany, pls consider Aluminium alloy developed locally.

If avionics are expensive (Israeli AESA / HUD / imported AAM integration / the 1000s of sensors, chips, computers, etc), pls consider local COTS, or US style Value Engineering of Defence hardware.

If we need 50 CAS birds,AESA radar is not required, just as it was not required on Mig-27 / Jaguar for 3 decades. I would buy AESA for 1-2 planes only, and communicate to others via radio link.

A lot of hardware has already been qualified on DARIN jaguars, these can pls be back ported to LCA instead of re-inventing the wheel.