IDN TAKE: DESI WEAPONS A BIG NO FOR AIR FORCE AND ARMY, WHY?

[Zarvan]

by Brigadier Arun Bajpai (Retd)

Recently the IAF has given a presentation to the new Defence Minister Ms Nirmala Sitaraman where IAF has said that they are not prepared to go even for the advanced version of LCA Tejas Mk 2 as it is not up to the mark. They want single engine fighters of the type F-16 being offered by US or Gripen being offered by Sweden.

Why IAF does not want Tejas is because it can carry armaments weighing up to 3 Tons only while F-16 can carry 9 tons and Gripen 8 Tons. Similarly they say maintenance cost of Tejas per hour of flying is very high as compared to F-16 or Gripen. Also that Tejas is still not fully cleared for operation. This may happen early next year .They further say that flying radius for Tejas is just 400 km as compared to thousand plus with Gripen or F-16. However all these points raised by IAF may not all be correct because of following-
· The F-16 is a 50-year old aircraft whose basic platform/architecture hasn't changed a whit even as bells and whistles have been added periodically to upgrade the aircraft.

· The Gripen, likewise, has logged a huge number of hours and because our military is institutionally inclined to accept anything foreign on faith, the Swedish item apparently evinces no worries.

· The IAF’s griping about ‘endurance’ — one hour for the Tejas vs three hours for Gripen and six hours for F-16. Each aircraft is made for a particular role. For the role Tejas has been designed it does meet the requirements.

· The Tejas wing area (storing fuel) is larger at 38.4 square metres compared to 30 square metres for Gripen. So it can have improvements as desired. Besides what is quoted for Gripen is its ferry range, for Tejas the fully mission-loaded operational range at 0.7 Mach speeds. This is not fair? Further, if aerial refuellers are used, the LCA range can be increased manifold (just as Gripen’s can be and F-16s). This was proven when the Tejas flew to Bahrain for the 2016 Air Show with only ONE refuelling stop.

· The fact is that the normal life of planes is 25 to 30 years, or 3,000 flying hours. The Tejas has been designed for four times this span at 12,000 hours. At 3,000 operational hours is when the airframe of the LCA will have to undergo strenuous tests to ensure there is no metal fatigue.

· If IAF wants more combat aircraft quickly, farm out the production of the Tejas to the private sector, With two aircraft production lines at HAL and two, three, or even four more lines with one each for Tata, L&T, Mahindra, and Reliance Aerospace with each rolling out 18 LCAs per year — the IAF will have a large force of constantly improved and upgraded Tejas LCAs in less time than it will take to get the game up with Gripen/F-16. The comparable cost, clean configuration (with respect to weapons, etc): Tejas for $25 million, Gripen $50 million, and the F-16 at $100 million.

As for Army they say that the Arjun Tank which the DRDO is developing for last three decades has with its 67 tons of weight become so heavy and unwieldy that it cannot cross most of the Bridges in India .In modern day warfare such heavy behemoth of a tank has no role to play .

All these arguments are OK and have merit but then what happens to indigenous arms industry? Let us not forget that in sixties we got hold of an excellent German Aircraft scientist Kurt Tank. He was father of famed German fighter Messerschmitt -109 which earned fame in WW2. Kurt Tank and his team produced an excellent Desi Fighter Aircraft Marut which participated in Indo -Pak War of 65. This indigenous fighter plane was excellent in design and handling except that it was underpowered. Surely we could have found an appropriate power pack for it in future. This would have opened new horizons for us in making of fighter planes in India. Lo and behold some Babus sitting in MOD in connivance with Netas finished this project. Maybe they had lure for that 10% commission which they get in every foreign deal duly deposited in their Swiss bank accounts we should not make the same mistake again. Let us not forget that F-16 is a 50 yr old fighter. Yes so many modifications have been done on it and US is offering us the latest type 70 Block D but weapon platform is now 50 yr old. Agreed that today F-16 is flown by almost 60 countries and it is time tested nevertheless it is now on last legs. As for Gripen it is new fighter however it has most of the parts US made? Which can be problem for us later.

We must not discard Tejas on whose development we have already spent nearly 70,000 corers. whatever its shortcomings they will get overcome if we give this project to our private defence production firms of TATA , Reliance, L&T, Kalyani, Adani Group and others instead of useless PSU the HAL. If necessary let them compete but we should never kill this project . Same goes for Arjun Tanks on which we have spent almost 25000 corers. Both IAF & Army should learn from Navy who are making all types of battle ships including Nuclear Powered Submarines of Arihant Class indigenously in their 4 PSU Shipyards.

Brig Arun Bajpai (Retd) is a distinguished Defence and Strategic Analyst. Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of IDN. IDN does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same

http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2017/11/idn-take-desi-weapons-big-no-for-air.html

 

[Sucha Kuggu]

thats their deal with their lords, we go low-tech, you go hi-tech... goods markets