arp2041
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2012
- Messages
- 10,406
- Reaction score
- -9
- Country
- Location
This refers to Ajai Shuklas column Making the Tejas fly (Broadsword, December 11) and his report Rs 1,500 crore more for combat aircraft Tejas as HAL fails to meet target (December 9). We are pained that he has chosen to criticise Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) based on half-truths and comments made by a retired personnel.
Let us not forget that there are delays in aerospace projects worldwide. Singling out HAL is, therefore, not fair. Given the national interest involved, comments against HAL and its monopoly too should be taken with a pinch of salt. We can confirm that the project is under consideration for upgrade of facilities to enable HAL to ramp up its production-capacity. The benefit of the funding is not intended for the current order that HAL already has in hand, but the actual requirement will be for future orders.
It should be noted that Tejas is currently not produced to frozen designs, as it has been conceived as a concurrent design and manufacturing programme. Inputs from flight trails are utilised to refine the design of the various systems and are incorporated in builing the next aircraft. Hence, changes take place in the hardware (structure) and considerable effort is involved to absorb these modifications in the subsequent aircraft. It is not that HAL does not have the capacity for production of Tejas aircraft. The production facility is already in place and the manufacturing of LSP (Limited Seried Production) aircraft is under progress. Contrary to what is suggested, HAL and the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) have cordial relations.
The writer says HAL-built Sukhois are costlier when compared to the job done in Russia. He ignores the life-cycle costs, though difficult to estimate at this stage, would be significantly higher if India depends on foreign suppliers in sustaining such sophisticated aircraft. After all, these Sukhois are likely to serve us, say, up to 30 years, and would need overhauling, repairs and upgrades that need to be carried out on Indian soil.
Gopal Sutar
Chief of Media Communications
Hindustan Aeronautics Limited
Bangalore
Ajai Shuklas response:
My opinion piece argues, among other things, that poor production quality erodes the Indian Air Forces confidence in Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL)-built aircraft. These points are known, acknowledged internationally and accepted by credible analysts in the Indian aerospace community the Indian Air Force, the Ministry of Defence, private sector defence companies and a growing number of people within HAL. I stand by the views expressed in my column.
The report in question is based on an official briefing by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), and multiple conversations with serving Ministry of Defence and Indian Air Force officials, who are obviously sensitive about being quoted. While rebutting nothing factual in the article, HAL wrongly says the report suggests bad blood between HAL and ADA. The report quotes ADA Director P S Subramanian to defend HAL. How does the article allege poor relations between HAL and ADA if it quotes the ADA chief defending HAL?
HAL does not deny that the Sukhois it builds are far more expensive than buying from Russia directly. Instead, it claims that building in HAL lowers the aircrafts life-cycle costs. Actually, despite paying its workers less than Russian manufacturers, HAL is costlier in manufacturing, repair as well as overhaul. HAL also claims that delays are endemic to fighter production and, therefore, nothing need be said. In fact, HAL has long exhausted all the slack that the Ministry of Defence and Indian Air Force could cut for it. In the eyes of its customers, HALs delays can no longer be condoned.
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Letters : HAL replies to Ajai Shukla
Let us not forget that there are delays in aerospace projects worldwide. Singling out HAL is, therefore, not fair. Given the national interest involved, comments against HAL and its monopoly too should be taken with a pinch of salt. We can confirm that the project is under consideration for upgrade of facilities to enable HAL to ramp up its production-capacity. The benefit of the funding is not intended for the current order that HAL already has in hand, but the actual requirement will be for future orders.
It should be noted that Tejas is currently not produced to frozen designs, as it has been conceived as a concurrent design and manufacturing programme. Inputs from flight trails are utilised to refine the design of the various systems and are incorporated in builing the next aircraft. Hence, changes take place in the hardware (structure) and considerable effort is involved to absorb these modifications in the subsequent aircraft. It is not that HAL does not have the capacity for production of Tejas aircraft. The production facility is already in place and the manufacturing of LSP (Limited Seried Production) aircraft is under progress. Contrary to what is suggested, HAL and the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) have cordial relations.
The writer says HAL-built Sukhois are costlier when compared to the job done in Russia. He ignores the life-cycle costs, though difficult to estimate at this stage, would be significantly higher if India depends on foreign suppliers in sustaining such sophisticated aircraft. After all, these Sukhois are likely to serve us, say, up to 30 years, and would need overhauling, repairs and upgrades that need to be carried out on Indian soil.
Gopal Sutar
Chief of Media Communications
Hindustan Aeronautics Limited
Bangalore
Ajai Shuklas response:
My opinion piece argues, among other things, that poor production quality erodes the Indian Air Forces confidence in Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL)-built aircraft. These points are known, acknowledged internationally and accepted by credible analysts in the Indian aerospace community the Indian Air Force, the Ministry of Defence, private sector defence companies and a growing number of people within HAL. I stand by the views expressed in my column.
The report in question is based on an official briefing by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), and multiple conversations with serving Ministry of Defence and Indian Air Force officials, who are obviously sensitive about being quoted. While rebutting nothing factual in the article, HAL wrongly says the report suggests bad blood between HAL and ADA. The report quotes ADA Director P S Subramanian to defend HAL. How does the article allege poor relations between HAL and ADA if it quotes the ADA chief defending HAL?
HAL does not deny that the Sukhois it builds are far more expensive than buying from Russia directly. Instead, it claims that building in HAL lowers the aircrafts life-cycle costs. Actually, despite paying its workers less than Russian manufacturers, HAL is costlier in manufacturing, repair as well as overhaul. HAL also claims that delays are endemic to fighter production and, therefore, nothing need be said. In fact, HAL has long exhausted all the slack that the Ministry of Defence and Indian Air Force could cut for it. In the eyes of its customers, HALs delays can no longer be condoned.
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Letters : HAL replies to Ajai Shukla
. ....maybe the news of HAL going public must have made its senior officials nervous and they seems desperate to keep their jobs. 
