Russian-Indian MTA project frozen — manufacturer

[Abingdonboy]

Thanks bro for the clarity.But pray, why 10-15 years of timeline ? Surely , if we do identify the powerplant & other vital component suppliers would the design & validation take that long ? Assuming it did , With the AN - 32 re furbished & functioning well , good enough for another 10-15 years , isn't it worth the gamble ?

10-15 years includes conceptualisation,designing, testing, production...

For a project of this complexity being undertaken for the first time as there will no doubt be the timeline one can expect. There can be (and will be) hurdles to address at every stage that were never accounted for at the start.

 

[Indiran Chandiran]

We can do it in India but our finished product may not be the best suited product for us..We are looking at 100 An32 replacements... Its a huge number... Coupled with the fact that tried and tested previously designed majors know what will work at finer points and where can be small optimizations done to improve efficiency in load handling and performance.

For example look at c130 .. If you go their website you can find C130s XJ a platform they have build from C130J stripping it down inside out and improving performance massively and reducing costs..

Thats the power of experience.. Our first product itself will take time and mind you it wont be in a league of something like C130XJ.. We can try and build as it will help us over time with feedback but then next 50 years - 10 years development and 40 years service would be very time testing for all concerned parties - MOD, HAL, ADA, DRDO and end user IAF

Thanks for the info bro.I still think it's worth the gamble.We have to start somewhere.Why not now? We can't continue importing such vast nos of Transport / Cargo Aircraft continuously.

Besides , we lack the technological edge to develop 4.5 g & 5 g fighter planes which means we would have to depend on imports to fill in the gaps & JV's ( which I suspect is the way AMCA will go. FGFA being too uncertain at the moment.Whatever the learning's we were to gain from FGFA which could possibly be extra polated to the developmnt of the AMCA can be ruled out even if it's so temporarily .That's going to cost us big money .)

Isn't this the right time to indigenously develop an MTA?@PARIKRAMA , @Abingdonboy

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Thanks for the info bro.I still think it's worth the gamble.We have to start somewhere.Why not now? We can't continue importing such vast nos of Transport / Cargo Aircraft continuously.

Besides , we lack the technological edge to develop 4.5 g & 5 g fighter planes which means we would have to depend on imports to fill in the gaps & JV's ( which I suspect is the way AMCA will go. FGFA being too uncertain at the moment.Whatever the learning's we were to gain from FGFA which could possibly be extra polated to the developmnt of the AMCA can be ruled out even if it's so temporarily .That's going to cost us big money .)

Isn't this the right time to indigenously develop an MTA?@PARIKRAMA , @Abingdonboy

Well JV route was taken to gather that experience only so that later we can finally move on to develop a world class product alone .. You are right about time to do it.. But then what also we need to see is what is plan B?

If say we give 15 years for full proto to come out certified and ready for production, then its awesome bcz with added capacity we can start getting the birds and retire or lower the operational use of existing fleet.

Suppose its 20 years instead of 15 then what? Take the risk higher say 25 years?

You see we need 2 prong approach here right now.. No doubt develop a MTA inhouse but we also require another platform in small but considerably significant number which can help us tide through say 25-30 years,,, Thats like hedging your risks...

 

[Abingdonboy]

Thanks for the info bro.I still think it's worth the gamble.We have to start somewhere.Why not now? We can't continue importing such vast nos of Transport / Cargo Aircraft continuously.

Besides , we lack the technological edge to develop 4.5 g & 5 g fighter planes which means we would have to depend on imports to fill in the gaps & JV's ( which I suspect is the way AMCA will go. FGFA being too uncertain at the moment.Whatever the learning's we were to gain from FGFA which could possibly be extra polated to the developmnt of the AMCA can be ruled out even if it's so temporarily .That's going to cost us big money .)

Isn't this the right time to indigenously develop an MTA?@PARIKRAMA , @Abingdonboy

I think a lot of what I have to say will simply be building upon what @PARIKRAMA has already stated.

The inherant risk associated with "going" alone is clear- failure. Look at the Kaveri as an example (even though I am in the camp that says it was far from a failure), if your homegrown project fails what then? You have a fleet in urgent need of replacing, massive sunk costs but nothing to show for it. This is a nightmare scenerio- 100+ AN-32s that form the backbone of the IAF's transport wing all but unservicable and a greater demand than ever will be placed on them going into the future. At that point any substitute (foreign order) would take 3-4 years to negotiate and 3+ years on top of that for first units to enter service by then your crisis will be a disaster and I think the Indian Military has had enough expereince with such disasters (SQN strength, subs, tanks, helos etc) to want to avoid such situations.

You have to have contingencies in place, this is what has offset some of the issues associated with the LCA's delayed induction- the IAF did not place all its eggs in the LCA basket as it were and thus has begun to replace MiG-21/27 SQNs with MKIs and in the future with Rafales whilst the LCA is getting up to speed.

An ambitious first of its kind project in India being sought to address a critical deficency would be repeating mistakes made in the past but this time adding elements of even greater danger.