But the thing is that a lot of expenditure under R&D header is permanent. Once our Engineers develop Uttam AESA, would you fire those Engineers or would you give them job of designing fifth generation AESA radar? Mind you expenditiure on facilities and salaries is permanent (unless you close them down).You would have to pay Engineers and Scientist and maintain your testing infrastructure and facilities, irrespective of whether you develop anything or not. Thus a large part of R&D expenditure has already been accrued.
R&D and development is the continuous process and in India there is already present the great talent. But we have many deficiencies too namely the political will that is needed to achieve something. We lack Industrial base, but it is not that big problem to support defense needs, but the institution that could shows us the need, that create, leads, show the path that builds our industry and nurture hrd and educational base.
IAF wants the LCA with every features from day one, but why IAF don't have the demand for the tandem seat trainer version and love HAWK, why she trains the pilot on Su 30MKI and not on tejas trainer whose glass cockpit could be modified to Mimic the functionality of MKI, thus increases MKI's tecnical life, low cost.
Why no development of multiple rack for BVR and light Light bomb.
Why there is no need for 100, 250 lb bomb for tejas, and rely on Spice 250.
Why there is no need for indeginous IRST development.
Why delay in Super Sukhoi program when this single step will inc. the capability manifolds
Why India could develop Arjun Tank but confused on IFV.
Why India could develop 4th gen LCA but struggling with Rustam.
Why IA asking Nag to hit the target on broad day light (When Pakistan Army would be crazy to mount attack)on Rajasthan when temp is 60 degree, so all IR senson won't distinguish between hot engine of tank and sand.
Why IA wanted MCW, which could not be meet with any gun in the whole world.
Why IAF/IA looking at the face of DRDO to show what is their demands.
Why IAF leadership expect more from DRDO, which has Pilot skills, but no engineering and scientific knowledge to know the difficulty. And why DRDO looking at the face of GOI to create the educational base and skill, and money.
Also as I said, AMCA has a longer horizon than Rafael, LCA or even FGFA (if we buy less than 100). By the time AMCA would roll out, assembly lines of these aircrafts would have closed.Only lines of AMCA, F-35C (if assembled in India) and FGFA would be open.
If you look at my above plan/stucture of acquiring fighter plane I have only chosen 70 Rafale and 100 FGFA, the minimum requirement with 300 + Super Sukhoi to deter PLAAF threat, giving the time and funds for Tejas and AMCA .
AMCA would logically play same role in 2028-30 that LCA is playing today ie that of replacing retiring Aircrafts, not addition of a new variety.
AMCA is very important, if we start working now with the help of Israel/Japan collaboration, it could be 28-30, otherwise 2035+
Aura is very very important program and should not be delayed at any cost.
@lavenge lavenge
Bro, With all due respect, i had stated that AMCA i see logically beyond 2030. Even R&D budget i say $2Bn is good to start off. My reasoning was posted earlier... The rest we discussed was based on hypothetical situations and out of box solutions..
About affordability, my reasoning is suppose we earmark say Rs 6500-13000 Cr every year for AMCA.. We know the actual results will need time. Lets say and assume a good long period of 15 years. Mind you this cost may be less considering 5th Gen tech is much more costly so international norm is around 25-30Bn R&D of course broken into parts. Since i don see the military industrial complex matured to handle such high tech as of now, i would rather advocate a mix of acquisition payment for LCAs, Super Sukhoi program, PAKFA/FGFA and Rafale tranches payment per year usage for such an amount which say gives us a mix of these birds year on year uptill 2030. No doubt MRCA retirement will come one day but Rafale is for 40 years. Implying we can easily start post 2030 when bulk purchases are more or less done by then.
Secondly, the private partnership and ecosystem development via LCA program production would have matured to a good degree with onset of PAKFA/FGFA production/coproduction which also gives us albeit if not full but limited access to 5th gen tech and may help us getting some parts procured directly like the engines instead of we continuing to find ways and means to develop our own 5th gen engine.
I see better usage of that money to do fleet acquisition in the next 15 years then AMCA investment..
.
Sir, I differ with your view. With PAKFA/FGFA India won't get any thing other than a product.
We have been license produce Mig-21, jaguar, MKI, hawk for decades but didn't got any significance knowledge. It was the LCA, which give us something-- We started working on MMR, and whatever we gain with this one project is what we have in Darlin and Mig 27 upgrade. There is no scarcety of lalent in country, Create an Institution other than DRDO, GOI, Security force, with members coming from all the parties, Political, Armed, R&D which could create the REQUIREMENT is what is needed. ADA have done excellent job in LCA, AMCA design is superb, ADA is confident, Money they are asking is not much, so give them their SHOT.
Also have you seen Russia don't want us to peek in Pakfa, and the indian requirement is different than the Russian. Russian want maneuverability on the cost of stealth, and IAF wants stealth on the cost of maneuverability.
