Tanaji wrote: ↑17 Jan 2026 05:45
Chetakji, while I fully get your point regarding the PSUs and lack of delivery from GTRE, a few points from my side.
The armed forces primary duty is to protect the nation from external threat. My humble assertion is that this should also include economic threats - there is a saying in marathi that says one should stretch only as long as your bed. The IAF asking for absolute top of line *at the cost of everything else * such as refuellers, AEW, HAS for assets etc isnt the best use of resources.
IAF is well aware of state of Indian industry or government labs. If that’s the case what is the point of asking for cutting edge ASQRs such as flat rated engines that require exotic metallurgy that we don’t have? Why not specify a RD33 level of engine technology and then iteratively work to develop it further?
The example of Volvo engine would not be possible for us. GE gave the license to do so to the Swedes. Zero chance of us getting that option.
The less said about IAFs treatment of LCA in the initial stages the better.
IAF knows exactly when and how its aircraft are being retired. Why did it not have a plan B except for putting all its eggs in the MRFA bucket? Did it not know how complicated the Indian defence procurement is for such big ticket items? Yet for IAF it was either MRFA or nothing else - a strange position to take.
This is no way excuses the scandalous behaviour of PSUs such as HAl that repeatedly lies on its deliveries and comes up with inane concepts like LIFT, Sport, Orca that will never see the light of the day rather than delivering what it is contracted to do..
As the saying goes… hamaam mein to sab nange hain..
Tanaji saar,
You missed my point about volvo. When they started to modify the commercial engine, the engine manufacturer was not aware of the project. It was much later that they informed the OEM. The volvo guys took a strange engine, redesigned the fuel system, slapped on an afterburner, rejigged some of the rotating parts, militarized the engine to power a fighter and best of all, it was a private venture, where volvo carried the entire risk
They had people inhouse who were capable of rising to the occasion, and doing such work, and such quality of people do not exist in our ecosystem system even today
we are beset by the flying testbed gang, the more money gang and the retirement gang. This is a bad recipe for a national project, especially one with proven geopolitical implications that is founded on the premise that strategic autonomy is central to our growth
I have been reading up on aviation history, aircraft and engine development for a long time now. In the 30s and 40s, young engineers fresh out of university were slotted in directly into the design departments and handed a part of the project that they then developed
Various companies and countries bought the license to various production engines and aircraft and went ahead to modify them to suit their own requirements.
I personally know of one lady engineer who was responsible for the earthquake resistant foundation of many of the high rise buildings in bombay's nariman point. Her insecure male dumbschitt colleagues ganged up on her and pushed her out of the company because they felt threatened by her work.
In the aerospace sector, we have no such recognized examples of people who can innovate and produce workable results.
From the grotesque saras mk1 that failed to the more conventional saras mk 2 example that is now being built with the first flight still some time away. The mk 2 engines are the more conventional tractor configuration rather than the previous pusher configuration. WTF did they even build a pusher aircraft, they simply did not have the experience nor the capability. Two of the more successful pusher aircraft are the the Piaggio P.180 Avanti and Cessna 337 Skymaster (which later successfully evolved into the military version Cessna O-2 Skymaster). Pushers are comparatively rare and are not commonly used
They did it because there is no control over them. for them, money is free and responsibility for failure is non existent. They don't take responsibility because for them finger pointing and blame shifting is an olympic level sport at which they all excel
A very similar story of disaster happened with that "idly" AEW aircraft, which crashed killing all on board because the "idly" peeled off in flight
Don't expect the military to fight with one hand tied behind their back, not when a lot of Indians upgrade their cars and houses and children's schools every four five years or so. It is their mentality that they need to be safer, so why not the forces or is that asking for too much
Many youngsters in the military are far smarter and more grounded than the pampered software coolies in infosys, wipro or tata whatever. Their lives, hopes, aspirations and families are no less important than anyone else's. Twenty something officers are leading their troops into battle, troops who trust and follow them into harms way. Is there any equivalent on the civilian side, so please do not talk of hamaams in such a casual fashion
It is a constant pressure to maintain the quality of the intake. That is why there is a shortage of officers and troops because a drop in standards would be catastrophic for the frontline operations. This is still a voluntary armed force eager to serve and it needs to be valued
Very few can really appreciate the hamaam of the forces, especially when compromised politicos and babooze insist on filling it up with freezing cold water. This hamaam is unique.
let us end this topic here.
