Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

indians love shopping -- or more specifically, haggling -- too much to ever cease being a client state.

sorry actually thats probably some unfeeling snark. but there definitely seems to be something deeper afoot that accounts for the state of india's mic. like a man addicted to self-help books, india still yet waits for the solutions of others, on their terms. it doesn't seem to want its own capability badly enough. india is too rule-abiding to be sovereign.

They work on that - just yesterday Tejas commitment grew to some 300 a/c(on top of already delivered mk.1 and prototypes), and it's likely not the end; there probably will be a follow on mk.2 order, I.e. potentially tejaswaffe will reach ~500 a/c. That's significant.

It's just an objective truth that India can't immediately go self-sufficient.

It took China long enough, too. And China(as a communist nation) was a manufacturing maniac since day 1, Chinese economic rise started decades earlier than Indian one...and it was way faster.
(Newest mk.1a taxing for first flight)

Gloire_bb said:

IMHO takeway here is they're more sure about mk.1A, but much less so about mk.2 onwards.
For all chain delays, mk.1As now at least exist.
As far as i understand, second order is meant to be Uttam one(i.e. “mk.1B”）. If it wails - backup ELTA option won't go anywhere.

Click to expand...

For India especially, the phrase "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" very much applies. Mk. 1A essentially tries to make the best of the "proven" Mk. 1 airframe, while Mk. 2 accepts more risk to deliver more capability. As the scope of planned Mk. 2 improvements increased (see attached image), alongside associated risk profile, space opened up for Mk. 1A. Given the many schedule slippages of Mk. 2 to date, it is almost certainly sensible to focus on what can actually be delivered, in the form of Mk. 1A. In hindsight, one opportunity that was missed in recent years was to opt for a significantly larger Mk. 1A buy in the first place, rather than this piecemeal structure. A larger block buy would've improved economies of scale and commercial incentives throughout the supply chain. Of course one major reason that did not happen is because IAF has (somewhat justifiably) been skeptical of the entire enterprise and has been reluctant to commit.

Mt1701d said:

My primary thinking is in the engines, which is the primary pain point of the whole Indian combat aviation sector. At this moment the Indians are completely reliant on the US for Tejas, the French for Rafale and the Russians on SUs. The Kaveri is still on the drawing board with more dreams and dopamine hits from PowerPoints.

Click to expand...

For better or worse (and it may well be worse), there appears to have been almost no interest or movement in the direction of Russian engines for LCA and other future aircraft projects. The circus has been conducted almost exclusively between India and western nations/entities, though Russian facilities have played some role in testing prior iterations of Kaveri. At the present moment, France/Safran appears to have the upper hand in terms of future engine technology collaboration with India, offsetting reliance on USA/GE as direct supplier of F404/F414 engines.

Atomicfrog said:

If they have a change of engine supplier they will clearly need an engine that fit in the hole of the f404/f414. Rd-33 is longer and larger in diameter anyway... M88 would fit but they will not get license for m-88. Still it would fit and commonality with rafale could be a thing.

Click to expand...

EJ200 is the most plausible "alternate engine" for LCA Mk. 2, having gone through critical design review as part of the engine selection process circa ~2010.

Atomicfrog said:

It could help to have a complete engine licensing and tooling, even for an older type like rb199 to have at least a solid base with a proven design to test upon with full tech transfer.

Click to expand...

That would've been far too sensible. No, India requires the best of modern or even future technology and if domestic industry is unable to deliver and foreign vendors are unwilling to transfer technology for rupees found underneath the cushion, then India will have no alternative but to continue with wholesale imports indefinitely. That will teach them.

Lethe said:

For better or worse (and it may well be worse), there appears to have been almost no interest or movement in the direction of Russian engines for LCA and other future aircraft projects. The circus has been conducted almost exclusively between India and western nations/entities, though Russian facilities have played some role in testing prior iterations of Kaveri. At the present moment, France/Safran appears to have the upper hand in terms of future engine technology collaboration with India, offsetting reliance on USA/GE as direct supplier of F404/F414 engines.

Click to expand...

Well atm, as far as I know, there is a jv between Safran and HAL to produces Leap and M88 components, so I guess it wouldn’t be a stretch to potentially supply the M88 for MK1A and MK2. The question is whether the French will be willing to provide the critical tech for full production in India, which I highly doubt, otherwise the MK2, or even the MK1A, should have been designed/redesigned with a possible switch to the M88 in mind.

For Indians not approaching the Russians, I would read it as more of pride rather than anything else. When India was looking for fighters for their various programs, the western powers put on a song and dance, with ToT promises or even a dedicated design of the F-16 in the form of the F-21. At the time a lot of Indians were trashing Russian aircraft and celebrating how the western powers had to bend over backwards for Indian market, only for India to over play their hand and ended up with nothing.

Thus, if the Indians take the initiative to approach the Russians now, they will be in a severely lowered position for any negotiation. However, if instead the Russians were to open negotiations then I think there are possibilities, I mean full independent engine production would be everything the Indians have wanted, considering the work and money they have poured into the Kaveri over the years, dangling such a carrot should allow the Russians a lot of room for negotiations and the Indians can also play it as a win over the Russians.

Russia makes a lot of money selling engines. If they supplied the technology outright they would only be creating competitors for themselves in the export market in the future or worse.

Lethe said:

For India especially, the phrase "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" very much applies. Mk. 1A essentially tries to make the best of the "proven" Mk. 1 airframe, while Mk. 2 accepts more risk to deliver more capability. As the scope of planned Mk. 2 improvements increased (see attached image), alongside associated risk profile, space opened up for Mk. 1A. Given the many schedule slippages of Mk. 2 to date, it is almost certainly sensible to focus on what can actually be delivered, in the form of Mk. 1A. In hindsight, one opportunity that was missed in recent years was to opt for a significantly larger Mk. 1A buy in the first place, rather than this piecemeal structure. A larger block buy would've improved economies of scale and commercial incentives throughout the supply chain. Of course one major reason that did not happen is because IAF has (somewhat justifiably) been skeptical of the entire enterprise and has been reluctant to commit.

Click to expand...

Yep, it was originally meant as a big upgrade like J-10C to J-10A.

Now it's simply a different aircraft, taking parallel role. 50% mtow increase, different aerodynamic configuration, 100% more payload while having substantially more equipment inside.

Mk.1a is more or less traditional Soviet style fighter-interceptor, rather barbone (though meant to have quite a few optional payloads...for the few suspension points it has).
Plus it's rumored it can't take its declared MTOW load.
MAWS? pod. Jammer? pod. IRST? pod...
All that on a small light aircraft, which won't really cross edge of the airbase without tanks, and where every bit of additional drag hits a lot.

Mk.2 on the other hand is meant to deliver a full on (light) multirole fighter, with very visible focus on delivering just that - payloads.
And indeed, having gentleman suit inside (maws, irst) it's just much easier to configure for actual strike mission.
On the other hand - if we talk about more simple GCI missions, mk.1A already does what mk.2 will only do later, for a lot of development money and future development risks.

Gloire_bb said:

View attachment 161561
(Newest mk.1a taxing for first flight)

Click to expand...

I've never realized how massive the actuators of the Tejas are. Might as well make them hardpoints...

Lethe said:

For better or worse (and it may well be worse), there appears to have been almost no interest or movement in the direction of Russian engines for LCA and other future aircraft projects. The circus has been conducted almost exclusively between India and western nations/entities, though Russian facilities have played some role in testing prior iterations of Kaveri. At the present moment, France/Safran appears to have the upper hand in terms of future engine technology collaboration with India, offsetting reliance on USA/GE as direct supplier of F404/F414 engines.

Click to expand...

If I'm not mistaken, RD-33 was considered but rejected. India wanted tech transfer on single crystal turbine blades which GE had but Klimov did not (RD-33 had the inferior columnar crystal blades). I think nobody wants to give this up in a ToT.