In response to Ajay Shukla's Article "buy-fighter-for-war-not-air-shows" article - to examine if this aircraft/any other whether 4th gen or 5th gen would bring Indian Defence any tangible benefits

Dear Mr. Shukla, I must tell u, i'm an admirer of yours. Your news always seem bang on target, from arjun of drdo to making Mr. Antony the scrape goat, that was until you quoted eurojet's bid as lowest and DRDO evaluation proved otherwise. May be you had direct access to the eurojet vendor and now he seemed to have left India in a hurry, since his company wouldn't pay his hotel bills anymore or just GOI didn't want CBI to begin an arrest, a diplomatic row with europe and another hdw scandanl. I could be way off of course. So are you in courting india to join the f-35 jsf programme instead of pursuing the mmrca competition. Perhaps its time for a reality check. To arrive at the optimal subjective and objective solution, we must analyse the facts throughly. To arrive at the proper conclusion, we may twist theories to suit facts but not facts to suit theories 1.mmrca was originally mrca, the mirage with 6 tons of payload but with western avionics, precision guided weapons and reliability was perhaps the Iaf's overwhelming choice, but unlike the DRDO and IN which had the leadership and resolve to push through sole source partnership in weapons development and procurement from Israel. IAF lacked both, initially in late 1990, the mirage was rejected in favor of the su-30 mki which the IAF now holds dear as the l1 bidder. This could have been the reason too behind CAG and other agencies involved in not giving in to the IAF and asked for requirements which may be thrown open to a competition internationally. 2. tejas flies in 2001.Fast forward 5 years, kaveri engine fails test, only basic look up and down mode of pulse doppler radar working, squadron numbers down by 6.5. the MoD has now reason enough to pursue MRCA. From the words of an IAF spokesperson whose name I don't seem to recall "when we asked for an aircraft, to bridge the shortfall in squadrons, we were told to wait for the lca tejas" this has been the prime justification for MRCA upto today. 3. I do not know if you are a passionate shiv aroor blog's follower, but perhaps this article of his might interest you http://livefist.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-isnt-hal-tejas-part-of-mrca-push.html Unlike the IN which defended the scorpene and Goskov acquisitions with full backing, the IAF has still not answered questions such as this from the media about Mmrca and tejas nor has it specified what role this new plane is meant for- Strike?- then why is there a separate weapon system operator on su-30 Mki. if prototypes such as gripen ng and mig-35 were given a chance, what did Tejas ever do to the IAF to deserve this step child treatment? 4. A sudden fetish for American due to aesa-, while the rfi was for f-16 bk52 the Us fields super viper variant. Boeing enters the run up fields the super hornet with apg-79. The rules of engagement were changed forever. Now IAF didn't just want a fighter to fill up squadrons but also a top notch plane that features the latest innovation so that they can save their ego from a future comparison of the procured aircraft with Hal tejas.

 5.Perhaps if the IAF may not answer to the media, atleast it bears responsibility to answer the questions posed by a man in its sister service namely vice admiral Raman puri http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=13702 don't mistake me for a ratshak fan, i just visit the news column. He may have been blunt on the following "the Iaf only needs updated su-30 and lca tejas" what he probably meant was use technology to enhance as much performance in collaboration with Russians for e.g to use composites to lighten the aircraft so that that its aerodynamic performance improves without the need for thrust improvemt of the engine. Already the mig-35 campaign has got its radar into this proposed upgrade. The IAF contests its stand as fighters such as rafale, eurofighter and super hornet fit inbetween su-30 mki and lca tejas in a middle tier, they must really take us for suckers. The su-27 was designed in early 1980s with huge not so fuel efficient engines deliverin thust at t/w 7-8 requiring the bird and such its lineage types such as su-30 for carrying 8 tons of payload such long distances to weigh 36 tons at max take off, its been 20 year since then carbon fibre composite and fibre glass composites have reduced aircraft weight considerably, engines have become smaller yet deliver as much power at t/w of 9-10, not to mention strict western aviation standards on fuel efficiency which results in fuel economic engines these factors combined have shrunk europeon aircraft sizes and with structural rigidity resulting from composites have low drag hence better aerodynamic performance than su-30,the rafale has too much french written all over it three loading classes, under powered omni-role, sorry there are already omni models in our roads, so no need for a flying one thank you, the french probably have outdone themselves here too. if composites developed by NAL could be used to optimise su-30 further, there isn't an iota of doubt that it would outdo its europeon peers with the much more powerful Al-31 F turbofan engine. The super hornet nearly the same as the rafale in performance by rough data, is the wrost choice there could be, except on the price front, a heavy fighter in empty weight, payload and range barely misses the max take of 30 tons and hence claims to be a medium fighter, crap. 6.Since 2001, the IAF inventory has been steadily dropping considerably. Is that a proper reason to scout for a competely new aircraft type? Lets look at a the very latest acquition programme. While the Su-30 mki was signed in nov,1996 at unit price of $ 36.55 mil and started getting inducted starting in 1997. The induction of the Su-30 was'nt without its share of problems. The average servicibility of the 10 Su-30MKs fell to 69% during 1997-1998 and further reduced to 62% 1998-1999. Similarly, the average availability of SU-30K aircraft for operations also declined from six aircraft in 1997-98 to four aircraft in 1998-99, out of total strength of eight aircraft. This happened because the MoD did not order spares for the aircraft and the IAF was using spares supplied at the time of induction - supplied back in 1997. The MoD finally signed the general spares contract in January 1999. Problems were multiplied due to the poor poduct support from the manufacturers. Apart from delivery of eight SU-30K aircraft during 1997 the manufacturer was required to supply 72 associated equipment like tyres, brake parachutes, specialist vehicles etc. valuing US $ 347.85 million, equivalent to Rs 1252.25 crore during 1997-2000 in a phased manner. The contract explicitly stipulated that equipment to be delivered by the manufacturer would be new, unused, of current production and serviceable. However, the a large percentage of the equipment delivered by the manufacturer between 1997 and 1998 was old, used, corroded, defective and unserviceable, though full payment had been made. For example, the specialist vehicles supplied were old, corroded and inoperable and others items like parachutes were torn and damaged. Aircraft tyres were found to have cut marks during initial inspection. The IAF made 48 claims from sukhoi but only 15 were cleared as of July 1999. With successful indegenisation the prombel has been stemmed within controlable margins.  Being the first in the service to operate the type, the No 20's task was to develop the doctrine for the MKI’s capabilities and hence was scheduled with a lot of training flights. 'HAL' the all in all of Indian Aerospace was provided deep tot at the indian tax payers expense to manufacture the Su 30 mki under TOT, these aircraft as per Hal claims cost $ 22.5 mil Subsequently.  By this time Su 30 planes were accounted to make up for 230 planes of the fleet force. HAL still has responsibilites for manufacture of all composite tail-fins and canards. Now an ad hoc order for 40 planes placed with Russia on Aug 2010 has pegged the price $ 102 per unit. Now back to the falling squadrons, When 126 planes were required immediately in 2001, we have sucessfully ordered 40 in 2010, while putting up a grand show called mmrca. One of the reasons the Su-30 program stretched so far was the lack of sub systems that needed to be developed, But since the tasks were taken on by the DRDO they could be customised with fluidity in design.And as HAL produces the Airframe completely, even tweaking it with Composites to provide it with structural strength weapons such as Brahmos could be done with relative ease and as we have unrestricted access to software codes, we could even use the aircraft as a test bed for indigenous weapons. There was even unsanctioned reports that DRDO developed AESA radar for tejas mk-2 would be part of Su 30 upgrade, But it now has been proved otherwise and that the radar would be Phazotron Zhuk AE radar.The least the platform can be used as a test bed for indigenous avionics and weapons. All these possibilities have been enabled due to the sole fact that 100% indigenisation of production has been achieved. The MMRCA is a different ball game to keep the Indian manufacturer happy 60 % tot , to issue a show cause support to domestic industry 50 % off-sets and to keep international Aircraft manufactures happy its a no holds barred competition with everyone in the fray. The only justification which IAF still held tejas was not ready was due to its lack of suitable power-plant, in testing phase and lack of Radar. With all due respect all the Fighters in the competition do have a fair share of all the above handicaps. Mig-35 and Gripen NG are prototypes, Mig-35, Super hornet and Rafale have the apt engines, the first a literally lowlife and the others with feeble power compared to their work load, the american planes are never going to share source codes of radars that makes their developed radars very much redundant, though willing to part with souce codes the Europeon Radars except for the Gripen are not even ready yet and funding itself has not been seen forthcoming and selecting the russian radar would only duplicate the Su 30's capability. While a AESA radar by French or Europeon Agencies would diversify our capabilities, it would make us hostile to pace of Europeon funding of their weapons programmes. Going by costs alone Jas -39 NG, Mig - 35 and F-16 IN might make the cut, all of them are paper planes only at their initial testing phase with the F-16 IN only in theory and Graphics. Simply put going for aleast 100 more Su -30 planes when mrca need was felt would have migitated Tejas failure risks to a larger extent. 7.An important note that is so obvious and yet rarely taken into consideration is that, accompanying any new Aircraft are fleet of Weapons and Sub systems. Due to the large size of the Su-30 order itself, the Airforce near vaccum of mordern  arsenal were flooded with russian weapons. Projects such as Novator K-100 AWACS killer and R-77 were given breathers, especially since we funded the development and are the largest customers as well. The end of the cold war has almost brought growth of Europeon military industries to a standstill, heralding two decades of consolidation. Due to lack of economies of scale, per unit acquitions have shot sky high making them uncompetitive in competitions agianst both Russian and American manufacturers vying to sell weapons to third parties. The Europeon Industry too has been in a bind of late, due to trans-national consolidation the responsibility of weapons development has come to hinge on the Arms vendors themselves and not the end customers, in the eurofighterWe might have been able to bank roll a bankrupt Russia to keep up its infrastructure from falling apart. But We surely cannot pay wealthy Europeons over and over so that they may take their technological lead over us for granted. We might have been able to bank roll a bankrupt Russia to keep up its infrastructure from falling apart. But We surely cannot pay wealthy Europeons over and over so that they may take their technological capability over us for granted. Your sympathy for the army and xenophobic concern of china are getting you distracted from ground realities. 1.If the Army really is sincere about Cooperation with IAF on high altitude mountains, they could have worked with IAF to develop ground strike capabilities for the tejas, besides not Just the IAF even the USAF is filled with yesterday's ACEs in its higher echelons, who would obviosly prefer Aircraft with superb aerodynalic performance so they can keep the skies clear than be concerned about troops on ground 2.china's excusive challenge now is the F-35 soon to be procured by japan, S korea etc. So the Chinese have more than enough reason to develop capabilities especially to counter such a weapon. Obviously u have been talking too much with US business interest groups and Indian Hawks. As an average indian, I believe there is no need for us to gang up on China and i believe the average Chinese don't consider us the enemy. the chinese State will now and for a long time into the future prop up Pakistan and Pakistan will always be too happy to oblige.