TARGET: One hopes that by the time IAF celebrates its centenary, its squadrons will have 100% indigenous fighters of at least three variants

With the first fleet of the indigenously-built Light Combat Helicopter inducted into the IAF, India should go all out to turn her ‘buyer’ air force into a ‘builder’ air force. Successive Indian governments have already taken too long to carry out indigenisation, despite buying the best machines for the squadrons.

A few years ago, the then Indian Air Force (IAF) Chief asked at a brainstorming meet: “Shouldn’t the IAF always seek the latest and best of fighters for the country’s security?” The answer, obviously, was an instant, unanimous ‘yes’, as a participant promptly quoted a loaded statement, gleaned from somewhere: “The exhortation to climb every mountain is best disregarded by those ill-clad for inclement weather at the peak.” The allegory was, and is, relevant even today as the IAF completes 90 years. The best machines indeed should be in the sky for the fliers.

With the first fleet of the indigenously-built Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) inducted into the IAF on Monday, India should go all out to turn her ‘buyer’ air force into a ‘builder’ air force. Successive Indian governments have already taken too long to carry out indigenisation, despite buying the best machines for the squadrons.

At the turn of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st, the IAF’s fighter inventory virtually made it a cent per cent “imported air force”. That’s understandable owing to New Delhi’s prolonged dependence on imports.

It’s not that Delhi didn’t try to come out of it. It did try; and the credit goes to the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s government for having approved the development of the ‘all-weather multi-role’ light combat aircraft (LCA) TEJAS in 1983. It’s important to remember here that the government preceding hers had peremptorily scrapped the earlier indigenous fighter programme ‘Marut’ more out of political than military or technological reasons.

Consequently, when the indigenous LCA program was reborn, it was back to the drawing board. Regrettably, this propensity for political folly and irrational rivalry to show their predecessors in a poor light has been the bane of India’s defence preparedness.

Understandably, the competing business interests of foreign manufacturers of fighter aircraft (owing to the slow pace of development of the indigenous fighter program) took advantage of the mistakes of the Indian leadership. And, expectedly decision-making gave a jolt to the timely choice of a suitable machine and the transfer of its technology to the IAF. Every foreign vendor saw India as a traditional and big market for products ranging from commercial goods to combat aircraft. They still do.

Nevertheless, once things thawed a bit, India’s LCA program began in earnest and didn’t needlessly try to touch the sky in one “vertical Charlie”. The idea, in 1983, had begun with the future replacement of MiG-21.

Hence, the parameter stipulated for the TEJAS had several similarities with the Soviet fighter. The initial batch of the single-engine IAF MiG-21 was of 11,240-pound static thrust (the thrust developed by an airplane engine that is at rest with respect to the earth and the surrounding air), with the afterburner taking it to 14,550 pounds. In comparison, however, the TEJAS engine was planned to inject more power into the single engine; 11,700-pound static dry and 22,400 pounds with afterburning.

In matters like the maximum take-off weight (9 to 9.5 tonnes), service ceiling (50,000 ft), payload (3 to 4 tonnes) etc, the TEJAS was planned and designed to be on a par with Soviet-origin craft. But, that was the calculation almost four decades ago. With time, the threat perception and the consequential scenario have changed. Hence, today it’s no surprise to see TEJAS, under new name TEJAS MK-IA (which is the new and improved variant of the operational MK-I), entering flight testing on May 20 (as per the annual report of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited). “Modified to MK-1A aircraft standard, it’s being used as a test platform for production and induction” of the present TEJAS, which’s already operational.

According to Jane’s Defence Weekly, the aircraft (MK-1A) are to be delivered to the IAF on schedule by 2024. Nevertheless, the credit goes to at least four past Air Chiefs for having relentlessly pushed the growth, development and deployment of indigenous air fighters for the IAF, thereby trying to remove the stigma of being an “imported air force”.

If one scrutinises the fighter programmes of the world’s top 10 air forces, it would emerge that only China, the US, Russia and France are the actual builders of their machines. Sweden, too, manufactures “Saab JAS-39 Gripen”, but none of the European countries today manufacture a fighter solo. It’s either a consortium of nations making a Eurofighter or the US-made F-16 or F-35 is the preferred choice across continents.

In this background, though slow, the steady progress of Tejas is laudable. One hopes that by the time IAF celebrates its centenary, its squadrons will operate with 100 per cent indigenous fighters of at least three variants for roles such as air defence, close air support to ground forces, counter-air operations and interdiction to deep penetration strikes through the electronic warfare system.

In the midst of India’s Tejas being operational, however, it would be in order to have some idea as to where the IAF stands today. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ annual Military Balance, India had 36 fighter squadrons in 2013 of 866 combat-capable craft and 25 squadrons of helicopters. The 2021 figures of Military Balance, however, show marked depletion of fighters, with 31 squadrons of 777 combat-capable craft. In contrast, the number of helicopter squadrons rose to 28, thereby virtually putting the strength of fighters and rotorcraft on a par.

Another point comes to the fore regarding Tejas. As a single-engine multi-role fighter, it’s got to have a minimum 27,500-pound static thrust, if not more, with the afterburner. That’s because it’s the fighter engine which impacts superior or inferior combat results, giving an edge, with outmatching performance/speed, service ceiling, payload, systems, avionics, armament and endurance.

Thus, whereas the 40-year-old Lockheed Martin’s multi-role single-engine F-16 Falcon generates 29,588-pound static thrust, the latest single-engine F-35 strike fighter creates 37,000-pound static thrust. Even the sparsely used Lockheed Martin’s twin-engine air dominance fighter’s F-22 Raptor gives 37,000-pound static thrust to each power plant.

Well, the perception — “India’s slow to take off and China is fast” — is valid. But, how has it happened? The Chicago Tribune’s September 27 edition gives a glimpse — “Former Chicago college student convicted of spying for Chinese intelligence service”. Ji Chaoqun was assigned by Beijing for aerospace espionage for the Chinese fighter development programme. Understandably, Ji’s not an isolated case. It’s part of China’s strategic long-term espionage. Hence, India, till now, is on the slow, but steady, track.