Pratyush wrote:NRS,
Just one quible, PAK FA shoiuld be single seat and not single engine.
Thanks for pointing out.. I actually meant single seat...Typo error... will correct the same
Austin wrote:nrshah wrote:Now consider, AMCA is also delayed...it is not available till say 2030(fair enough?)... Still we have a competent force of over 600 4++ gen planes... with an option of another 60 odd planes (MMRCA). Not to mention the inventory will be very new with only 100 mirages and mig 29 at the end of life..
.
nrshah , that is what my point is it is not fair to the IAF , We should do something within our reach , on schedule and has risk taken care of at the design stage.
It would be unfair to the IAF to promise Stealth , Supercruise all fifth gen attribute when we have not done any research in that area via prototypes to get the ground work done like the US did with YF-22/23 , some classified programs and previous generation fighter like F-117 to reach to F-22 , similarly Russia has done such works via Mig-1.44 and Su-37 program to arrive at PAK-FA. ( remember both have experience in internal weapons bay and developing capable engine that goes into 5th gen program )
What this means that any AMCA that promises all fifth gen attribute has a big risk involved with it which also mean big returns if you succeed , which means more money and more time to complete even if you suceed.
DRDO can develop a Typhoon class fighter with the current Tejas base in a specific time frame ( ~ 10- 12 years ) with lower risk and can stick to schedule . If AMCA can develop into an affordable twin engine fighter , which can reduce the number of MMRCA needed to just 126 as is being envisaged ,can replace Mirage , Mig,Jags in IAF fleet then IMO its a job well done.
We already have taken care of 5th gen program by opting for co-development on risk/money sharing basis with Russia which was a smart and practical decision.
Austin, If IAF feels 5 years delay is unfair, than there is no point of any discussion...All the programmes invariably lead to delay... We saw that with Gorky, Scorpenes, JSF, even MMRCA, Artillery and what not... And if IAF feels it is unfair and hence DRDO should be punished (by not sanctioning the program itself), what punishment should be given to IAF for not modernizing itself (50% of our capabilities are obsolete, sorry Obsolescent), where a lot of things are to be imported directly without involving our domestic R&D... Let us not go into reasons for the same as even the delay in LCA/AMCA can be justified by reasons
Any new development will invariably carry some risk, What needs to be looked into is what will be the back up if the program gets delayed...Just like the case of USN, they have ordered additional SH to compensate the delay of JSF...
The point IAF needs to consider is:
----- Whether the delay will result into diminished capabilities (the answer is no - We will be having around 700+ 4++ fighters including over 150 5th gen fighter and considering the threat scenario we foresee it will be more than sufficient... The problem with LCA was that this breathing factor was not available where over 50% fleet was due to retire and could not be retired because of delay)
---- What level of importance they attach to indigenous development? Do we always want to play a catching game... Just ponder when we started LCA, the world already has multiple 4th gen fighters already inducted... and were developing 5th Gen aircrafts... Now when we talk of AMCA, there will be only difference of say 5-10 years when JSF / PAK FA would have been inducted...So actually we have shortened the gap...Do we want to widen the same again...
---- Do we have back up plans in case of delay? Yes multiple options available... 1) Increase MMRCA (additional option of 64 can be increased to say 100/125), 2) Increase no of Pak fa/FGFA 3) Increase no of LCA MK2
---- What are the numbers of Rafale/EF type planes, that we will develop (As per evolution theory), we will induct... Going by the developments and when 5th gen will be available, I dont think they will be inducted in huge numbers...Is the cost of developing such aircraft and induction feasible considering we can always order much of such aircraft just by order for which we already would have assembly lines ready... The project itself will be termed as failure going by its numbers in IAF unless we are able to export them in huge numbers.
---- What incremental quality does Rafale/EF will have over LCA MK2 equipped with AESA, IRST, advanced EW and high thrust engines? Can't we upgrade them to those levels after 2025? Anyways, the first of LCA MK2 will be due for upgrade by 2025/2030...
---- Can LCA MK2 (even the first version without upgrading as above) capable of tackling the threat from one side of the border? Can we increase its numbers to say over 200 whereby our rest of the forces will be available to fight the mightier enemy on the other side?
I am not arguing my point is correct and best point of action.. What I am implying is that it is very serious decision affecting our hard earned capabilities and closed gap (As per ADA Chief, we have to jump 2 generation), and as such a lot of thinking, discussion, debate, simulation of various scenarios in case of delays, risks, mitigation etc has to done before we take any decision on the same...