MiG had several proposals for single engine fighters along the years in Soviet times. After they designed the MiG-21. But they were persistently shot down by the government.
For example the Izdeliye 33.
Or the much earlier Ye-8.
Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
For example the Izdeliye 33.
Or the much earlier Ye-8.
I'll give you one.
The LCA program started in 1984. Design was finalised in 1990. First flight was in 2001. 5 years from decision to design, 10 years from design to flying prototype. If all the other elements were in place it would be ready for production within 5 more years.
Compare with Gripen - program starts in 1980, contract in 1983, prototype in 1987, first flight in 1988 (due to indigenous FBW issues), first serial production in 1994. And Sweden already had experience with modern fighters.
Tejas meant to be developed and produced domestically so importing components was contrary to the aim of the program and India wasn't in a hurry.
Here's something that most people miss about Tejas - the aircraft that IAF bought in the 1980s:
- 40 MiG-23MF from 1982
- 40 Mirage 2000T from 1985
- 40 MiG-29 from 1987
- replacement MiG-21s (built by HAL, total number built is over 800 since 1964)
- 160 Jaguars from 1979 (120 built by HAL)
- 95 MiG-23BN from 1981
- 210 MiG-27 from 1985 (built by HAL)
Tejas was supposed to be their replacement after 2005-2010 which fits on a timescale with the first flight in 2001.
So the question is: if everything went according to plan where did it all go wrong?
The answer is: in Russia.
With no domestic orders Russian defense industry was faced with starvation so around 1995 Russians approached India with an offer to develop the Su-30MKI. Russia agreed for HAL to manufacture it locally, with the exception of radar and engines, as well as agreed for extensive modifications with the use of third party solutions - Israeli and French - which meant that Su-30MKI was legally a joint project. Contract for first 50 aircraft was signed in 1996.
Note: Tejas FBW program was only started in 1992.
That offer wasn't something that India imagined when planning Tejas because USSR would not share its best fighter with India. Soviet Union offered India its weapons on good conditions but they weren't best systems available. The leasing of an obsolete (first boat in class) Charlie SSGN (Chakra) was a complicated matter.
But Su-30MKI was the best system available in Russia.
What's more important China already bought Su-27 which means that India would have to match them. They would either buy Su-27s or more expensive western equivalents. It shouldn't surprise anyone that when given the opportunity they changed priorities at the expense of Tejas.
Su-30MKI was a product of 1995-2004 which is when 100 of 272 planes were built. F-22A was only entering serivce. It meant that India had a heavy multirole fighter more capable then any in Russian air force and comparable to American F-15E.
This is why USAF sent F-15s to test the MKI around 2007-08.
Su-30MKI proved to be so successful that it convinced Kremlin to finance the development of Su-30SM with domestic solutions - which means that India developed the Su-30SM for Russia and a significant part of funding for other systems used in Sukhoi's planes were funded or co-funded by India. Irbis-E was developed from Bars, and Bars was developed with Indian funds.
Su-30MKI was a success story and if it wasn't for the fact that Russia didn't have good radar technology it would still be considered a very capable aircraft. Russian radars are the problem. AN/APG-63 could be upgraded to (v)3 standard with AESA antenna but Bars (slotted/planar) can't be upgraded to Irbis-E (PESA) and Byelka (AESA) has completely different system architecture.
But it isn't even particularly a problem of Russian radar technology as it is the fact that China managed to skip a generation with their own radars as well as aerial and electronic warfare doctrines. Because of that the two threats that India faces - China and Pakistan - suddenly shifted their potential.
Tejas is a problem not because there's something particularly wrong with Tejas, but because the solution that India developed to China/Pakistan problem in the 90/00s suddenly and unexpectedly became obsolete some 10 or 20 years too early. That solution required Tejas to take a back seat in terms of priority or funding but it would be fine, until China "cheated" and started building J-20s, J-16s and putting AESA radars everywhere when it wasn't supposed to.
Look at Japan or Korea: apart from F-35s their air forces are nowhere near as capable and the modernization will take time. Look at European NATO - apart from the few countries who got F-35s first most are flying 90/00s designs. Eurofighter and Rafale only now get AESA arrays because nobody funded it. Even the US is forced to speed up development because of China's progress in the field.
But for India it gets worse because the solution to any future threat was considered and because of how successful the Su-30MKI India chose to develop another joint project - FGFA based on Russian PAK-FA.
If you ignore the technical problems and just evaluate the decision on a political and economic level (which is how defense procurement is decided!) there was nothing indicating that it was a bad idea. When you look at the extent of Russian-Indian cooperation in the 90/00 it was a streak of massive wins for India and everyone expected that trend to continue.
But...
First to gain monopolistic position over Mikoyan Sukhoi lied that they have the PAK-FA design solved when they didn't.
Then when energy prices rose in the 2000s due to American wars Kremlin decided to play supapowah and shifted resources to rapid modernization (State Armaments Program 2010-2020) and retaining of size, rather than capability of armed forces.
Then in 2014 even more funding had to be redirected away from R&D to improving readiness and modernization of active forces and sanctions took 50% of exchange rate.
And then in 2017 came CATSAA and India split from FGFA because it no longer was practical to stay involved.
The original plan was good. India would have Su-30MKI and Su-57 clones and wouldn't worry about Tejas so much. But Russia didn't do their part and India has to quickly catch up with 20 years of delay. Nothing that is happening around Tejas is out of ordinary. EF2000, Gripen, Rafale - they all had similar issues, except those countries could afford to reduce buys and delay capabilities while for India whatever they do with Tejas is too little too late.
And because of that every year that Tejas is delayed the opportunity to sell something to plug the hole becomes very profitable. So the narrative in the media doesn't reflect what the technological reality is but what each side wants it to be to make their sale of product.
-------
As for the "missed opportunity" of licensing MiG-29...
MiG-29 was designed for Soviet doctrine in Europe. It was a short range frontal fighter (which is a Soviet doctrinal role) with good speed and climb and maneuverability to beat NATO fighters in WVR one-on-one. And indeed when it entered service it was a very capable plane with many advantages over its opponents. But it was a flying Strv103 - unique design optimized for technology at the time which was made instantly obsolete by introduction of stabilizers and composite armor.
MiG-29 was made instantly obsolete by active homing missiles and better radar technology and every optimization for WVR became a burden.
For USSR it wasn't a problem because MiG-29 flew in 1977 and entered service in 1983 with planned service life of 25 years so replacements would start around 2005.
But India was buying MiG-29 in 1987 and service life would definitely be longer than 25 years and they would be the only ones funding the development of a better radar, avionics and weapons.
Russian electronics was behind western which is why Su-27 radar - which could have better parameters due to size of array - often decided the sale. MiG-29 was too small for Russian radar technology
Here:
Why buy and obsolete and inefficient airframe to install western systems? The very point of Tejas was to have a modern and efficient airframe.
One of the reason why Romania modernized its MiG-21s instead of MiG-29s in the 90/00s was because there was not much difference in performance and economies of scale favored LanceR. With good ground control or AEW a MiG-21 with helmet cueing and modern combat system is not much worse. So why would India buy MiG-29 when they had Bisons?
Poland uses MiG-29 and F-16 and tested Mirage and Gripen in 1998-2002. Here's what the pilots say about the Fulcrum vs the others:
- lack of ARH missiles disqualifies it in modern BVR combat (duh)
- weak and primitive radar greatly reduces situational awareness
- IRST is limited to R-73 range so it doesn't help
- no ground attack capability
- lack of FBW and outdated control systems make flying it a chore mentally and physically.
- Luftwaffe pilots were impressed after 1991 because they could only compare it to F-4
Also there's no aerial refueling. Which is why MiG-35 had to be completely redesigned compared to MiG-29 and MiG-29K/M... to offer 1999 quality in 2019.
I doubt Indians considered the Su-30MKI a replacement for the Mig-21.
Third world countries love small single engine jets simply because they are cheap to operate. Look at the cost to fuel a mig-21 compared to a Su-30MKI. it is a massive difference. The multirole capability of something like the Su-30 is overkill if you just want to get something in the sky to intercept an intruder.
That's why even now Indians maintain hundreds of Mig-21, despite their old age and very high airframe hours.
Its not a joint project. It is under license project. some minor things are from those countries but they are nominal in value.
It was later Algerian orders that rise to Su-30SM.
There is some thing called Sanctions and rise of BJP with its slogan of Swadeshi also may have contributed to slow down.
A well thought out post, but I disagree with some of your conclusions regarding the impact of Su-30MKI on the Tejas. From @Lethe's link, I could find some excepts from a book detailing the development of the LCA/Tejas written by a former IAF Marshal
No issue with the conclusion on the timing, but a note.
Tejas was primarily meant to replace the MiG-21 as originally conceived, so aircraft like the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29 would not be replaced by it. Similarly with Jaguar and MiG-27 which were for strike missions.
The author of the book mentioned many MiG-21s needed replacement by the 90's, so the plan would be for LCA to transition smoothly from first flight into mass production.
MKI as an aircraft is successful, but as a program for India, it has issues owing to the undeveloped aircraft industrial base in India. The MKI was supposed to be a full technology transfer agreement, if I recall correctly, with even more generous terms than those signed with China (90's Chinese military watchers were quite upset with what India was able to acquire from Russia. Not forgetting the background that Russia did not want to sell the Su-27 to China initially since the relationship was only recently reestablished while the India-Soviet Union/Russia relationship was always strong). 30 years since that contract, much of the content of the MKI is still foreign made and overhauls require Russian support. Obviously, China does not have this issue with their Flankers.
It is true that the speed of the development of AESA in China did catch Russia (and India) off guard. In 2000's Russia had hoped to sell Pero (Panda) Radar to China (if the nickname did not make the intended customer obvious enough) based on the success of Bars for the MKI. Naturally, if China was not confident in their radar progress, it probably would have at least hedged their bets.
Partially true, but we have to remember that Tejas was also supposed to jumpstart the radar development in India. Some of the oft cited key domestic development goals of the program were:
1. Engine (Kaveri)
2. Digital FBW System
3. Radar (MMR/Uttam), initial batches would be equipped with Foreign radars
4. Advanced composites application
Only one goal was successfully met, FBW system. Composites application is a partial success (They are able to build the parts, but I believe the basic materials are all imported), and the others are MIA. A valid question is whether it would have helped India to continue their original development path even in light of the developments in China (and by association, Pakistan).
As noted in a post above, MKI and Su-57/FGFA was not going to replace Tejas. Yes, if there were sufficient numbers of both aircraft, Tejas could be less of a priority as IAF would still be able to match up with PLAAF and PakAF. However, it would not negate the need to replace the ever-aging MiG-21 in quantity.
We also cannot forget that Tejas was meant to be a platform for domestic development. That has not happened according to plan and that is not Russia's fault. True that delays and scope changes are ordinary standard engineering things, even in China there are delays related to things like the AWACs program, domestic Turbofan engines for fighters and cargo aircraft. However, Tejas has very little to show for all of it. This is the big problem.
JF-17 is such an easy comparison to make because the genesis and role is so similar. A MiG-21 replacement. On top of it, there are similar setbacks (sanctions imposed which removed a lot of foreign assistance). However, there can be no argument that JF-17 is objectively more successful.
1. There are a greater number built
2. Follow on improved variants have been delivered operationally (not just on paper like Tejas Mk1A and Mk2)
3. Exported to other countries
So even with the background that the Russian failure to deliver Su-57/FGFA caused a ripple effect in terms of priorities and funding, it cannot be the sole source of blame.
No issue with the conclusion on the timing, but a note.
Tejas was primarily meant to replace the MiG-21 as originally conceived, so aircraft like the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29 would not be replaced by it. Similarly with Jaguar and MiG-27 which were for strike missions.
The author of the book mentioned many MiG-21s needed replacement by the 90's, so the plan would be for LCA to transition smoothly from first flight into mass production.
MKI as an aircraft is successful, but as a program for India, it has issues owing to the undeveloped aircraft industrial base in India. The MKI was supposed to be a full technology transfer agreement, if I recall correctly, with even more generous terms than those signed with China (90's Chinese military watchers were quite upset with what India was able to acquire from Russia. Not forgetting the background that Russia did not want to sell the Su-27 to China initially since the relationship was only recently reestablished while the India-Soviet Union/Russia relationship was always strong). 30 years since that contract, much of the content of the MKI is still foreign made and overhauls require Russian support. Obviously, China does not have this issue with their Flankers.
It is true that the speed of the development of AESA in China did catch Russia (and India) off guard. In 2000's Russia had hoped to sell Pero (Panda) Radar to China (if the nickname did not make the intended customer obvious enough) based on the success of Bars for the MKI. Naturally, if China was not confident in their radar progress, it probably would have at least hedged their bets.
Partially true, but we have to remember that Tejas was also supposed to jumpstart the radar development in India. Some of the oft cited key domestic development goals of the program were:
1. Engine (Kaveri)
2. Digital FBW System
3. Radar (MMR/Uttam), initial batches would be equipped with Foreign radars
4. Advanced composites application
Only one goal was successfully met, FBW system. Composites application is a partial success (They are able to build the parts, but I believe the basic materials are all imported), and the others are MIA. A valid question is whether it would have helped India to continue their original development path even in light of the developments in China (and by association, Pakistan).
As noted in a post above, MKI and Su-57/FGFA was not going to replace Tejas. Yes, if there were sufficient numbers of both aircraft, Tejas could be less of a priority as IAF would still be able to match up with PLAAF and PakAF. However, it would not negate the need to replace the ever-aging MiG-21 in quantity.
We also cannot forget that Tejas was meant to be a platform for domestic development. That has not happened according to plan and that is not Russia's fault. True that delays and scope changes are ordinary standard engineering things, even in China there are delays related to things like the AWACs program, domestic Turbofan engines for fighters and cargo aircraft. However, Tejas has very little to show for all of it. This is the big problem.
JF-17 is such an easy comparison to make because the genesis and role is so similar. A MiG-21 replacement. On top of it, there are similar setbacks (sanctions imposed which removed a lot of foreign assistance). However, there can be no argument that JF-17 is objectively more successful.
1. There are a greater number built
2. Follow on improved variants have been delivered operationally (not just on paper like Tejas Mk1A and Mk2)
3. Exported to other countries
So even with the background that the Russian failure to deliver Su-57/FGFA caused a ripple effect in terms of priorities and funding, it cannot be the sole source of blame.
Lethe
Captain
Prodyut Das wrote on the JF-17 back in 2018. Summary: JF-17 is a better aircraft and a much, much, much better program:
In terms of identifying the problems with Tejas go....
Last edited:
That is the thing. Russia did not "fail" to deliver the Su-57. Just look at it. It is in service. India just could not stomach the investment and time required to do the development of an advanced aircraft it is as simple as that. Russia managed to introduce a lot of advanced elements to the design including composites, AESA radar, and modern avionics. The engines had already had a lot of the risk retired with the Su-35 but they also represent a major step up versus the Al-31 in the Su-27. The Izd. 30 engine is still not in service but needs to be so that Russia can have a true 5th generation or better engine. Project Megapolis will further improve the avionics. But as is the aircraft meets all the initial design objectives.
India should have tried to license produce engines and buy licenses to engine designs before jumping into designing Kaveri. China had experience with license production of the Rolls-Royce Spey. Which is a 1960s engine design but at least it is an afterburning turbofan. Allegedly China also bought the schematics and production license for the Soyuz R-79V-300 engine in the late 1990s. That is basically on paper a 4.5th generation engine. What prior experience did India have before jumping head first into designing Kaveri?
Same with Turkey, they've gone ahead of the Indians after starting late. They built tons of know-how through license production.
This is getting off topic so feel free to move my post to the India forum or delete it.
The current most capable fighter built by India is the Gen 4 Tejas, As of 2022 indigenous content in the Tejas Mark 1 is 59.7% with an American engine and Israeli Radar. The current Tejas is at best a learning experience, The IAF had to be forced to take it.
The in development Tejas mark 2 will be India's first gen 4.5 fighter, The first flight of Tejas Mark 2 is expected to be in 2023.
With the record from the latest decades of constant delays from the Indian defense sector i would be surprised if the Mark 2 is operational before 2030, the AMCA is to far out to even speculate when they still have not proved they can build a competent gen 4 fighter.
For starters, I disagree with your standards/how you frame the issue.
It does not matter what the origin of the technology is. If India learns how to build a subsystem, it doesn't matter if they got it from the Romulan Star Empire. So they've already bought the Israeli radar and they have already developed it into Uttam. The GE engines will also be manufactured in India, so it doesn't matter that it's from America or the moon.
I think you would lose the bet on Mark 2 not being available before 2030. They project it to come online in 5 years.
The first prototype of AMCA is scheduled to roll out in 3 years, which is much faster than the claim of the person who said China is 20 years ahead of India.
With regards to your claim of India not being able to build a competent gen 4 fighter, remind me of when China was able to actually make a reliable engine for a single engine fighter. 2022?
I would say the China being 20 years ahead of India claim is absurd given:
Engines - technology transfer is included, thus catching India up to China in engine production
Radar - already bought from Israel, incorporated into Uttam AESA and flight tested
Air frame - the shape of the plane is already established and the prototype estimated by the government to be airworthy next year
You can laugh at that and talk about delays and Arjunk and whatever, but the point is that it ain't 20 years behind China. If we consider that China couldn't build a 4th gen engine until 2022 and if India is producing GE-414 in 5 years, then you could argue they are 5-10 years behind China in simply building engines.
If they already have a working AESA, then again that's not close to a 20 year gap.
And they already have the airframe design of Tejas Mk2, and let's say both Tejas and AMCA go 2 years behind schedule, that still puts India 10 years behind China.