'Make in India' Single engined fighter

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 07:41

Vivek K wrote:Why do you think that IAF will lose 10% of fleet strength every week? because of its decision to buy the LCA?

Let us not hide behind rhetoric and make the necessary disclosures. I am parapharsing information from Jasjit Singh's book on air warfare. The above statement of yours is an example of clever BRF rhetoric that attributes to me things that I did not say or imply.

What I said is in my post. If you extrapolate and think I have said something else - that would be what YOU said - not me. And that would be clever rhetoric too.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Nov 2016 07:45

Never thought that I would senior posters in this mode! But sab chalta hai!! How does it matter - only a few billions!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 07:47

Vivek K wrote:Never thought that I would senior posters in this mode! But sab chalta hai!! How does it matter - only a few billions!

I respect your opinion and I am sorry if you feel hurt by what you understand of my statement.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Nov 2016 07:51

Not hurt Shiv. I've been here long enough to understand some things. I respect your point of view. I was once banned for speaking against the LCA. I have come a full circle. I am for Swadesi because no matter how many imported screw drivers we have received, we have not emerged as producers.

Now we are looking for baksheesh to take Pakistani jhootan and take it to war and expect to become superpowers. I'm sorry but my "Indian Eductaion" does not help me buy the fake "Make in India Slogans" that this sircar is mouthing. I expected more from Modi ji. I am still hoping that he will change his mind.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 08:05

We have a problem Vivek. We have a real problem and everyone is guilty - government, air force and even us people although our guilt is OT for this thread.

But let me say this: and they are two sides of the same argument
1. Protectionism is a barrier to free trade and competition. Competition is good
2. Protectionism is necessary for strategic programs

Both these statements hold true with regard to defence production. In private companies - competition will either kill the local company or make them compete to get market share.

But what India has done in the name of socialism is to create PSU monsters that are inefficient and we cannot get rid of them India has it's monkey paw in a jar of PSU peanuts.

Even HAL for all its profits is weighed by inefficiences of promotion and salary increase based on time, inflation and age rather than productivity. There is no requirement for sacrifice among many of the staff like class 4 employees who must be employed and paid but are yet not part of an essential strategic job force.

Let me post a scenario that may be scary but could also turn out good.

Imagine a future when we actually invite foreign companies to make say Gripen AND F/A 18, and also private company making the Shin Maywa with Japanese collaboration. What will happen to HAL?

HAL needs the ultimatum of delivering on
1. Tejas
2. AMCA
3. IJT
4. HTT 40

If it fails to deliver the company needs to be hived off - shares sold to private investors and the inefficient bunch of employees taking assured government salaries home given voluntary retirement. We have to squeeze these monsters

HAL can stick to its successes - the Dhruv and LCH and maybe LUH and Russia collaboration aircraft. Maybe they will yearn for one more collaboration with Russia ie IRKUT MC 21

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Nov 2016 08:06

Shiv, if the statement was by Jasjit Singh then it should have been attributed to him in your original post. To prevent any confusion to any poster.

I seem to recall a report which suggested that the in any future war against the TSP, IAF will loose 70 to 90 fighters.

Having said so, the losses would be caused regardless of which platform that is being used by the IAF, western or domestic. As it is simply the nature of war.

A domestic platform, with a domestic supply chain will make it easier and cheaper for the taxpayer to rebuild fleet strength, if the prediction does comes true.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 08:25

Pratyush wrote:
A domestic platform, with a domestic supply chain will make it easier and cheaper for the taxpayer to rebuild fleet strength, if the prediction does comes true.

Pratyush if you look at the history of all air warfare - starting from WW2 - you find that in the late years it was only the US that was capable manufacture to keep pace with losses. Germany was eventually tired out and despite being able to make 2500 planes a year (or some figure like that) in 1944 they lost. I need to look up the ref but I think the US was producing 10,000 planes a year in 1944. How many factories is that?

The rate of losses we had in 1965 and 1971 would be unsustainable had the war gone on for 3 months against a more powerful adversary.

India has never ever produced more than 2 planes a month and is still incapable of doing that should an emergency arise. If all we can produce in one year is 24 planes - that could be less than one day's losses in a big war with a tough foe. We could lose 3 years worth of manufacture in 3 weeks.

I believe it is better to be realistic rather than romantic. Our PSUs are cobweb riddled monsters who are a protected strategic racket. The only way to break free is to avoid war and build up private industry. After AMCA HAL should get NOTHING. Do not place orders with a monster company that is a hallmark of government inefficiency that only looks good in comparison with OFB

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 06 Nov 2016 08:33

Shiv, every country tries to bend the rule to promote its domestic players. Competition is hogwash put out to catch smaller producers/nations off guard. Where is the competition in the US? Two players in the fighter completion? Two players in the tanker competition and when the foreign player one, the air force called the contract off?

If we have a problem with the public sector classification of HAL then there are several options to fix that
Break HAL into several profit centers and put these up for sale - Helicopters, Engines, Fighters or some such and sell to the highest private Indian consortium. I agree that HAL has become too big and has too many things to do. Propping up Taneja Aerospace or another entity is beneficial to getting things done. The IJT could be taken and given to the new company which also inherits the manpower that was working on IJT.

So consider the scenario that you posted - a little further down the road:
a) The swedes find out that IAF is planning to modify their Gripens for Nuke roles. The Swedes are horrified and don't want to be held responsible. They upload a virus or some mechanical defect through their subsidiary that grounds the entire fleet.

If the PSU structure is a problem, then fix that instead of running to foreign vendors.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 08:35

Shaurya and others have argued with me sayiong that the PM in India has more powers than the US President. That may be on paper. I am not going to argue. Let any PM, Modi or Modis' grandfather try to shut down ONE PSU and the unions will shut down the entire nation. The only way to handle our PSUs is to make them redundant. It was different making HMT and ITI redundant, but HAL has enjoyed a monopoly for decades along with a shared heritage of thousands of government employees getting a job like driver or clerk at age 18 till age 60, with regular increments, bonus, overtime, paid leave, medical benefits, subsidized schools etc. wtf? We have been shooting ourselves in the foot for so long that we no longer feel the pain. we have no foot and are probably brain dead as well supporting our monster PSUs.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 08:46

Vivek K wrote: So consider the scenario that you posted - a little further down the road:
a) The swedes find out that IAF is planning to modify their Gripens for Nuke roles. The Swedes are horrified and don't want to be held responsible. They upload a virus or some mechanical defect through their subsidiary that grounds the entire fleet.

If the PSU structure is a problem, then fix that instead of running to foreign vendors.

Vivek it is possible to have many such scare scenarios and I cannot say that they are wrong. I do not even claim to have the answer.

But I sometimes get the feeling that Modi has a particular vision that is very interesting. I don,t want this to be a political discussion - but the name Modi evokes instant disgust or admiration in India.

To me it seems that Modi is engaged in "strategic alliances" to attract lucrative investments from companies and nations whose economies have been hurt by the rise of China and increased competition in the arms bazaar. For example I see the Shin Maywa news as significant. Japan has not exported any mil capable stuff to anyone and we on BRF have often called Japan as one of Pakistan's 3.5.

Our private industry needs to be cranked up and we have very few options because of our heavy investment in PSUs. PSUs have filled themselves with sweepers, drivers clerks, bureaucrats and sundry lifetime employees who cannot be retrenched and the companies get land free, old buildings have been acquired for free at independence. We cannot close them and we cannot squeeze efficiency from them. We are in a massive rut that was coming. Making the LCA a success was a morale booster but now we find HAL saying 'We can give you 16 a year max". What shit is this? They get everything free but that is all? I would not invest in this company any more. In 20 years HAL should be cut down to size and we should see a 1000% (that is not a typo) increase in private involvement in aerospace. Short of that we are fcued. No more Jai Nehru PSU

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Nov 2016 09:07

Shiv, just because some thing has not happened historically doesn't mean that it will not happen in the future.

In the US German example that you quoted, the figures for both are approximately 50000 and 35000 respectively. Germany lost due the massive US+ USSR, industrial capability, and the loss of fuel supplies for training of its young pilots.

In Indian context, we need to move beyond the Khari gram udyog model and thing in terms of matching the PRC military industrial complex. As it is only a matter of time before the PRC masters the logistical challenges of bringing and sustaining a modern fighting forces in Tibet.

Having said so, we must develop capabilities of dealing with the PRC, and not just defensively. A domestic MIL-Industrial base is the most vital requirement in this case. Which cannot be brought about by imported lines and designs.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 06 Nov 2016 09:13

JayS wrote:

There was enough there in that post to take offense, Jay... but, whatever. I have read some of your posts, and you do know stuff. It would be a lot easier to follow you, and a lot less trying, if you don't come with such a fixed point of view. This applies to a lot of other people as well, including some posters like Karan who are obviously extremely knowledgeable as well as abrasive when it comes to dealing with conflicting opinions. If your purpose is to help others learn more, you actually do yourself a disservice. But that is your choice and taste. Party on, I guess.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 09:17

Pratyush wrote:Shiv, just because some thing has not happened historically doesn't mean that it will not happen in the future.

Please excuse me for this Pratyush but the above statement is rhetoric

Pratyush wrote:Having said so, we must develop capabilities of dealing with the PRC, and not just defensively. A domestic MIL-Industrial base is the most vital requirement in this case. Which cannot be brought about by imported lines and designs.

This is a truism. The devil is in the detail

I am not trying to suggest anything to anyone.

India has never produced more than 1.5 planes a month. This has gone on for 6 decades during which time we have fought several wars including 2 in which we lost more planes than we could make in many years. (This is fact)

I am sure "things can change" and the past is not necessarily a guide to the future, but if we do not do anything different than we have done in the past I an unable to understand how we can make the future different? It is not as if we have not invested in PSU. All our investment has gone into PSUs with free land, buildings - entire colonies built for staff. We ask for efficiency and we have given 6 decades. What do we get? (This is rhetoric)

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 09:19

What do we need to do in order to have the industrial capacity to make 10 aircraft a month?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Nov 2016 09:44

Shiv Saar - you answered that very question yourself in this thread - Tier 1 suppliers.

P.S. Having been at the receiving end of your verbal assaults, I state the above with no sarcasm intended. Please don't shoot me.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 09:48

veer madrasi adi kollu ban Rakesh

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Nov 2016 09:50

What I fail to understand is how did we manage to royally screw this up. For nearly 16 years the Tejas has been flying and never once did anyone think about establishing an assured Tier 1 supply line.

Joshua, Joseph & Mary...what is bloody happening in the MoD, IAF and HAL?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Nov 2016 10:00

Rakesh in one word orders.

Now to expand on the word, till 2009 it was treated as a science project by the various agencies. Once it moved beyond the prototype stage, the navy got on board, the NLCA made IAf say we will order 40 original LCAs as MK1 while we will wait for the Mk2 to mature. In the mean time after a lot of work was done on MK2 and its capabilities were defined by the end user, it was counter proposed to the end user that aside to the structural changes demanded by the MK2 everything else can be done by the MK1 as well, which later designated as mk1a and the ACM grandly suggested that we are open to 80 more. Which was around the Air force day this year.

So while all the drama was going on, no one seriously asked the IAF as to why the MK2 was so vital that they could not order mk1 in higher quantities, till the maturity of the MK2. And when mk2 came up all the orders would be shifted to Mk2.

In all this, I would not criticize the HAL or its sub suppliers in any way shape or form, regardless or its sins in the past.

Marten · Post by **Marten** » 06 Nov 2016 10:39

This is by design, not chance. We have several generations to blame. This lack of integration and cohesion is deliberate even though the latest policies are primed exactly to prevent the users from walking away from responsibilities, and labs from tranferring accountability for funds consumed.
Let me link some interesting sections from the DPP for instance:

Make - Project Management Unit
7. Each SHQ (including Coast Guard) shall establish a permanent Make - Project Management Unit (PMU), within its service. The Make - PMU must be headed by a two star rank officer or equivalent and staffed appropriately with professionals of various ranks/branches and specialisations, depending upon the nature and the number of ongoing/envisaged projects under ‘Make’ procedure, for the respective SHQs. The Make - PMU Head, under each service head quarter, will have a tenure of three years and the staff positioned in PMU shall have longer tenures to ensure continuity during execution of projects. Officers of PMU shall be members/member secretaries of the Integrated Project Management Teams (IPMT), which will function under the overall control and directions of the Make – PMU Head, who shall be responsible for ownership of the service level ‘Make’ projects. The mandates of every Make – PMU are as follows:
a) Closely monitor the implementation of ‘Make’ projects for the corresponding SHQ.
b) Ensure timely development and implementation.
c) Assign responsibilities and hold task owners accountable for delivery.
d) Identify potential issues that will impact project cost or delivery, and resolve them swiftly.
8. Make - PMU may also hire expert practitioners from domains such as finance,l egal and technology, from public and private sectors. Expenses for hiring the services of experts/consultants shall be borne by the SHQ concerned.

What is the take of senior members on this? Rohit would obviously have gone over this. However, do you see where the responsibility for the Make section lies? Not with the DPSU, but with the PMU supposedly headed by at least a 2*.

Irrelevant OT detail: In the case of Tejas, it would be a 3*! This gent stays about 100m from where Shiv saar plays golf. On Saturday mornings, said gent would also be at the same course. You would never see Cmde Balaji or his staff from ADA or HAL staff (not even the Chairman) anywhere near that course! I know for sure that the IAF pilots loves the bird -- but the entire spectrum of serving staff are dead against the same HAL that also assembles/produces almost all the planes they fly! There has to be a solid reason. We just don't know it yet. HAL must have taken Mk1 lightly because it doesn't own the a/c. In which case, Shri Balaji looks like a promising CEO for a new tie-up with Baba Kalyani/Anil Ambani / Mota bhai / Ratan bhai-Ramadorai to take up. This will take 5 years even though it can be done in a year! Why? Because land/infra/funds come to HAL whereas the others have to strive that much harder. Ergo, the Tejas will not see its full potential for another 5 years. And in 5 years, we will see the F-16 crush the entire supply chain.

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 06 Nov 2016 10:44

shiv wrote:What do we need to do in order to have the industrial capacity to make 10 aircraft a month?

Shiv-saar,
Kindly let a newbie (on BRF, not in life) chip in. The very first thing to do, which no one is discussing, is to have the design itself conducive to manufacture. In-process small changes in design identified by the manufacturing steps itself for the sole purpose of increasing yield is standard procedure for highly complex system manufacturing. For this the design process itself would be highly dynamic.

HAL is wrong in claiming 16/year as Max (in reality no one believes that number either, could be 5 to 6). A process that continuously improves yield to the target level of 10/month can be implemented. It's a technical problem and has a technical solution.

Hypothetical Example:
When the GE engine is attached to the frame for the very first time, they do a vibration test at various rpm. If the vibration test fails at any point, the engine is removed and is installed on another jet body (mix and match). Immediately a root cause need to be found, and in next batch a small design change is implemented to overcome this issue, and there would be hundreds of such incremental improvements going on over a few years until you hit 10/month.

Often manufacturers advertise time to change engine for serviceability, this is arrived at after many years of manufacturing improvements. On a new design such as Tejas it could be a very elaborate process including wiring harness, plumbing, and what not, could be a week or more.

Supply-chain, babudom, nehruvian PSUs etc are philosophical. Think of the guys on the shop floor where the work gets done.

(hiding for cover and running to Benis Thread)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Nov 2016 11:03

Rishi,

Good post and no need to hide anywhere. We need people who can explore issues related to mass production and provide real inputs on threads, based on experience and industry practices.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 11:17

Rishi Verma wrote: Supply-chain, babudom, nehruvian PSUs etc are philosophical. Think of the guys on the shop floor where the work gets done.

I don't dispute this. But the shop floor guys in HAL are no more important than the drivers, resident painters, carpenters, gardeners, sweepers etc. They are all entitled to increments, government holidays, restricted holidays etc.

For a technical person on the shop floor - it is true that he is a key element. But an organization that is full of other employees who will never leave because it is an easy and cushy job is never going to rise above their inefficiencies.

Once in medical college - JIPMER - a central government organization - a class 4 employee (maybe a ward boy/cleaner) slapped a junior doctor. We doctors went on strike. We thought we were the most important cog in the wheel. But no. Ultimately we were forced back to work and nothing happened to the man who slapped the doc. The doc himself was later intimately involved with HAL - but that is another story. We doctors (and students) were the temporary employees. In HAL engineers may come and go, but the drivers, gardeners, plumbers etc have a lifetime job.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 06 Nov 2016 12:13

Cosmo_R wrote:
Karan M wrote:.. HAL has money parked, enough is enough and all three need to make the Mk2 happen, starting from the MOD and IAF. HAL and AdA ultimately will go along with MOD.
So why don't they spend it and deliver a MK1/2? After all, if they fail, as a PSU, HAL will still have to be bailed out right? What is the risk to them vs. the IAF? The latter have to deal with a 200 a/c shortfall for sure.

Spending parked money is a sure fire way to build cred. Earning interest on it to show profitability not so much.

Does HAL really have the capability? They have the "parked money". They supposedly have the know how. They should go for it if they have the guts and the vision. What exactly is stopping them?

Prove all skeptics wrong. And those proved wrong will cheer.

In the meanwhile, let us not sacrifice IAF pilots who fight today's battles with yesterday's need that will arrive tomorrow.

If our leaders had had the common sense to get it right the 1980s or even 2000, we would not be talking about this today.

Any war we have next is going to be brutish, nasty and short.

Those who don't survive past the intensity of round 1 (72 hours) are not going to make a difference with science projects that deliver over 10 years if everything goes well.

JMT

Why not take efforts to find answer yourself on who the hell has the power to take decision on this matter before this rant?? I have asked this question 3 times on this thread, no one seems to want to take a dig - who do you think take financial decisions for HAL in case of LCA?? If you try to find answer to this simple question, you wouldn't be blaming HAL.

BTW that parked money is gone. MP took it back to make a war chest. On top of it GOI took 6000Cr from HAL to fund its ventures elsewhere.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 06 Nov 2016 13:18

Y I Patel wrote:
JayS wrote:
There was enough there in that post to take offense, Jay... but, whatever. I have read some of your posts, and you do know stuff. It would be a lot easier to follow you, and a lot less trying, if you don't come with such a fixed point of view. This applies to a lot of other people as well, including some posters like Karan who are obviously extremely knowledgeable as well as abrasive when it comes to dealing with conflicting opinions. If your purpose is to help others learn more, you actually do yourself a disservice. But that is your choice and taste. Party on, I guess.

You get what you give to others, simple. I felt your post was offending the same way. Your post was patronizing and haughty. Why throw stuff like, "can't to give credit to fellow Indians" or "I have posted it all before, cant you see you blind people" or "ignoring evidences due to CT blinkers", "cranky chair marshals due to US politics". Before professing other how not to be abrasive you should lose such phrases which are telling signs that you are doing exactly the same against which you warn others. Its easy to make generalised passing remarks.

Please tell me one point which has not already been raised here already. Only one - to justify "There is plenty of evidence waiting to be observed and evaluated, once the CT blinkers come off."

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 06 Nov 2016 15:09

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.co.nz/

Colonel Shukla reports that Boeing has recieved request or interest from IAF for a twin engine fighter.
What the hell is wrong with us.

And last not least do we want another thread called Indian twin engined fighter or would you like this renamed as ... we don't know what hell we want ?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 06 Nov 2016 15:28

Khalsa wrote:http://ajaishukla.blogspot.co.nz/

Colonel Shukla reports that Boeing has recieved request or interest from IAF for a twin engine fighter.
What the hell is wrong with us.

And last not least do we want another thread called Indian twin engined fighter or would you like this renamed as ... we don't know what hell we want ?

I have already proposed "Screwdrivergiri Multirole Fighters under MII".

rohiths · Post by **rohiths** » 06 Nov 2016 15:32

JayS wrote:
Khalsa wrote:http://ajaishukla.blogspot.co.nz/

Colonel Shukla reports that Boeing has recieved request or interest from IAF for a twin engine fighter.
What the hell is wrong with us.

And last not least do we want another thread called Indian twin engined fighter or would you like this renamed as ... we don't know what hell we want ?
I have already proposed "Screwdrivergiri Multirole Fighters under MII".

They should express interest with Eurofighter and Rafale and we will back to that MMRCA saga. It will take another 10 years to get any fighter. In the middle there can be a change in government or babus or defence minister and the whole process will start again. What a joke

.
Good news for LCA. There is hope after all

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 06 Nov 2016 15:36

shiv wrote: I believe it is better to be realistic rather than romantic. Our PSUs are cobweb riddled monsters who are a protected strategic racket. The only way to break free is to avoid war and build up private industry. After AMCA HAL should get NOTHING. Do not place orders with a monster company that is a hallmark of government inefficiency that only looks good in comparison with OFB

[/quote]I could not agree more. The only thing I will add is expedite this process. Disinvest HAL, OFB and DPSU's now - along with appropriate DRDO labs to create this private MIC. You are also right in stating the political headwinds to do so would be great on an administration.

Not related to this thread directly, but for folks who want a fresh read. Attached is a link on what kind or racket the PSU's are. https://www.newslaundry.com/2015/08/26/ ... estigation
Ofcourse there have been many other works documenting the racket in great detail. Very Very few in the political class will want to eliminate this gravy train. Fewer still would want to take on the entrenched interests. The handful who have tried are called fools and failures. But to me they are the bravest of the brave. In this case, looking for someone to bomb the MoD. Sadly Parikkar-Modi duo are not that combination.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 06 Nov 2016 15:39

I am sure of one thing, if Modi has decided to assemble 2 fighters in India, for good or for worse, it will happen soon enough. Make no mistake this is not UPA.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 06 Nov 2016 15:45

JayS wrote:
I have already proposed "Screwdrivergiri Multirole Fighters under MII".

+1.

arvin · Post by **arvin** » 06 Nov 2016 16:14

I think it is good news that boeing likes to set up factory on the lines of LM. I am for everyone who wants to set up factory in India with only rider that partnership should NOT be with HAL or any other Navratna korma DPSU.

Most important thing is time-boxed filling up of squadron numbers in IAF and Navy, so if it means parallel FDI investments in two/three different factorys so be it. Purely guessing, I see atleast one of the factories being set up in Gujurat probably F-16.
With Rafale in nashik, Boeing in Hyderabad , aerospace axis might shift to Western central india from the present pot belly Bangalore structure.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 06 Nov 2016 17:20

I have always said that it is not transfer of technology that is important but transfer of the brains behind the technology. One of the reasons ISRO is successful is that it's earliest scientists, people like APJ Kalam saw first hand and learned space technology at NASA. And when they came back they were given a relatively free hand by Vikram Sarabhai who had enough clout with GOI to run ISRO his way. The result is the ISRO of today.

In contrast, HAL has not had that kind of expertise or dedication or champion with enough clout. Somebody or a group of people like Kalam and his colleagues who worked in Boeing or General Dynamics and then came back to establish HAL. Furthermore designing and building a fighter aircraft arguably requires a mastery of many more disciplines than rocket flight. And now it is too late for HAL. As Shiv says, today it is a bloated inefficient organization beyond redemption with thousands of employees who make no contribution but cannot be fired by anyone including Modi. The only option is to build an alternate nucleus or more than one nucleus for aircraft manufacturing in the country.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Nov 2016 17:35

Public sector workers across India went on strike to protest Prime Minister Modi's push for privatization and demand higher wages

PSU workers will paralyse the nation rather than do what the other 96% of the country's workers do. And they have a stranglehold on defence production. No wonder China can vicariously control our defence industry

srin · Post by **srin** » 06 Nov 2016 17:39

My first post on this thread with my analysis
Going by the news that ...
a) Rafale offsets will be carried out by Reliance,
b) We want to procure single engine fighters presumably by pvt entities despite having LCA that is being made by ADA/HAL

... leads me to conclude two things ...
a) that the Govt wants to jumpstart pvt defence industry even if it starts with screwdriver-giri. Pvt industry in India have issues with debt or risk-averseness and hence doesn't want to do capital investments unless there are sure orders. Having a sure order and a foreign entity to help out wouldn't hurt at all. Hopefully, they will climb up the value chain in medium term.

b) that the Govt/services foresee a "hot war" where these might be used in around 5-10 years from now and that the PSU/OFB combo won't be able to deliver quantities necessary and DRDO isn't able to design the products required. We should have done this 10 years ago - so we could have been ready for a hot war *now* - but the last 12 years or so have been a lost time. There is an unmistakable sense of urgency now.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 06 Nov 2016 17:43

83 Tejas MK1A, 15 LCH Gunships on Parrikar’s agenda in DAC meeting - IDRW.org

I think Indian govt is sensing something, that is why they are on accelerating spree to acquire air platforms. I also think, we will going to acquire F-16 assembling/tooling from LM, and all US Tier-1 and Tier-2 suppliers manfucating foundries/machines that makes parts for F-16, these parts foundries will be given to Kalyani, TASL, L&T, Chota-Bada Bhai and other companies.

Even I think LM and/or Boeing will act consultant/facilitator to AMCA, and AMCA may come in 2 variants, one will be air superiority/interdiction platform and another will be bomb lugger. We are preparing fro war with China (even for deterrence, we need a big danda). Depending solely on HAL to produce numbers is not wise, and in this regard, US will be our geopolitical ally.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 06 Nov 2016 17:45

Essential Reading on LCA and HAL

http://www.cag.gov.in/sites/default/fil ... pter_7.pdf

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 06 Nov 2016 17:49

chota bhai is setting up factories in MP for def manufacturing...

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Nov 2016 17:58

Hot war may likely happen and the govt may foresee something brewing. But just because Modi & Co see it, that is not going to speed up the process of acquiring 200 single engine (or twin engine) fighters. This still has to go through the various stages from RFI (where it is now) to RFP to evaluation to down select to negotiation to signing of contract. The bureaucracy will insist on this and Modi is limited in his options to make that process go any faster. This is the MMRCA tamasha all over again.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 06 Nov 2016 17:58

kmkraoind wrote:US will be our geopolitical ally.

I hope people who use this word know what it means and also the fact that India has no stated or otherwise goal of being an "ally" to anyone.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Nov 2016 18:14

JayS wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:
So why don't they spend it and deliver a MK1/2? After all, if they fail, as a PSU, HAL will still have to be bailed out right? What is the risk to them vs. the IAF? The latter have to deal with a 200 a/c shortfall for sure.

Spending parked money is a sure fire way to build cred. Earning interest on it to show profitability not so much.

Does HAL really have the capability? They have the "parked money". They supposedly have the know how. They should go for it if they have the guts and the vision. What exactly is stopping them?

Prove all skeptics wrong. And those proved wrong will cheer.

In the meanwhile, let us not sacrifice IAF pilots who fight today's battles with yesterday's need that will arrive tomorrow.

If our leaders had had the common sense to get it right the 1980s or even 2000, we would not be talking about this today.

Any war we have next is going to be brutish, nasty and short.

Those who don't survive past the intensity of round 1 (72 hours) are not going to make a difference with science projects that deliver over 10 years if everything goes well.

JMT
Why not take efforts to find answer yourself on who the hell has the power to take decision on this matter before this rant?? I have asked this question 3 times on this thread, no one seems to want to take a dig - who do you think take financial decisions for HAL in case of LCA?? If you try to find answer to this simple question, you wouldn't be blaming HAL.

BTW that parked money is gone. MP took it back to make a war chest. On top of it GOI took 6000Cr from HAL to fund its ventures elsewhere.

Exactly. There is a limit to spoon feeding. These guys know who call the shots, it isnt HAL and then posture with saying the same stuff over and over again, wrapped up in some weepy dirge about how others dont seem to care about IAF pilots. yeah, buy F16s and all will be well.