ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

MonaLazy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
827
Likes
4,860
For building Mk2 prototypes, the funds will be cleared by CCS as a separate budgetary assistance or to be spent from HAL/ADA's funds only?
There are no prototypes- if you mean TDs- only production-standard samples. Also given that the lead time for ordering some aircraft parts is rather long at 3+ years and MWF is rolling out next year- that means the funds are allocated from ADA/HALs own purse- just like LCH/LUH etc.

There seems to be a tussle going on between IAF & GoI. Here's the idrw story on it-


IAF fears that Tejas Mk2 program might be used by Government of India to sabotage or downgrade MRFA requirements for 114 jets.

ADA has sought a Joint meeting between IAF and MoD officials on this matter apparently, but MoD seems to be backing the program and has told ADA/HAL to continue work on the rollout of the first aircraft
 
Last edited:

Covfefe

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
2,451
Likes
14,753
Country flag
There are no prototypes- if you mean TDs- only production-standard samples. Also given that the lead time for ordering some aircraft parts is rather long at 3+ years and MWF is rolling out next year- that means the funds are allocated from ADA/HALs own purse- just like LCH/LUH etc.
How many TDs are planned before the actual production run? Any idea?
 

MonaLazy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
827
Likes
4,860
How many TDs are planned before the actual production run? Any idea?
TD, IOC config from first aircraft. 4 are planned.

Medium Weight Fighter or (MWF) won’t be having Technology demonstrator aircraft nor PV (Prototype Vehicle) aircraft in its initial development stage and instead the first aircraft for which metal cutting will start from next year to be ready for first flight by 2024 will be Limited Series Production (LSP) standard aircraft with Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) configuration

ADA says that MWF-Mk2 program benefits from its long experience with the development of the Mk1 program due to which it can skip TD and PV Stage to cut development phase to just 5-6 years

ADA says that design of MWF was frozen in 2018 and previous close-coupled canard work on Mk1 has helped Engineers and designers collect a lot of Research data before and same has been applied after numerous computer-aided simulations have taken place on current MWF design which shows that aircraft will not require stringent flight testing as required previously.

idrw.org has been informed that at least three pre-production aircraft MWF aircraft will be developed in next few years by ADA which will be exclusively used to fast rack its developmental circle so that it is ready for production by 2025-26. When asked about the complex and time-consuming testing of close-coupled canards and its software certification, idrw.org was informed that in phases, additional capabilities will be made available and ADA has finalized all of the software development before conducting flight trials, so that capabilities are added in phases and the whole spectrum is tested and bugged out before it enters production.

MWF will not have TD (Technology Demonstrators ) or Prototype aircraft but will have pre-production aircraft which will be IOC standard equipment from the start and more pieces of equipment related to Final Operational Certification (FOC) standard will be added and tested before it is cleared for large scale production but limited Serial production of the aircraft will be underway even before FOC is granted which will reduce developmental circle.

ADA will not follow the earlier set of flight test method adapted when LCA-Tejas Mk1 was in development, the goal now is to get more out of each flight test hour and carry out multiple trials of equipment to reduce flight regime which was previously followed. LCA-Tejas Mk1 flight regime was slow and painful due to fear of accidents and crashes which had the potential of closing down of the whole program and lack of experience in testing a brand new aircraft also didn’t help and a whole set of methods had to be developed which was perfected by trial by fire by ADA and HAL. duplication, meaningless flight tests, and clueless engineers were quite common in initial years of the program, instead of accelerating the program after the arrival of the TD and Prototype aircraft, the program slowed down and both had to learn from their mistakes and fast adapt which often were time-consuming.

When MWF enters flight test regime, the evaluation team will be tasked to achieve major milestones for the program quite early which will include attaining supersonic flight, achieve flights maneuvering targets, testing of the carefree-handling of the flight control system and commence load tests. Testing of the onboard equipment will begin pretty much soon their after and any integration teething issues or bugs will be sorted out before it enters the weapon testing stage.
A total of four prototype aircrafts are planned for the flight test program. However, these 4 aircrafts will be production standard aircrafts, unlike LCA MK1 which saw the evolution through technology demonstrator, prototype vehicle and limited series production stages before serial production was taken up. This an indication of the increased maturity in the team vis-à-vis design and manufacturing capability as well as project management. In other words, the production of MWF will continue in the background as the flight test program is put through its paces.
Source-


 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,395
Likes
33,493
Country flag
If you buy Mk1As in enough numbers- deploy them to both borders then maybe they don't need any swinging- fight from their respective bases? Why is our thinking stuck in the '50s-'80s when resources were meagre- there's money, there's capability to manufacture- the only thing lacking is vision in the customer & a sizeable order for the Mk1As. As many as mig-21s (800 or so?) were back in the day. Or if 1 Mk1A = 2x mig-21 then 400, if 1 Mk1A = 3x mig-21 then 250 and so on.. only 123 does not justify the enormous national resources that have gone into this 4 decades long project esp as IAF is drooling over 36+90 MRFA Rafale- if we can have 126 of 4x expensive fighter then why not 4x numbers for Tejas?
MWF is evolved form of mk1a. It is true form of lca program. Pilots are loving mk1a already but our philosophy of war has changed . We are no longer just a defencive airforces but we need a airforce which can punish enemy deep inside.

That's why those 800+ migs are being replaced by su30mki , Rafale and later MWF.

MWF can carry enough payload deep inside enemy land for penetration strike while being equipped with self protection jammers , maws etc. Mk1a can't to deep penetration against china.

Hence MWF is required and not more mk1a.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,395
Likes
33,493
Country flag
Nope.

90 Rafales will come, if at all, via MII- at DRALs 104 acre Mihan facility. Indian production will not be affected by pressure on French lines. But I pray that some sense gets knocked into IAF and they desist from MRFA- speeding up MWF and AMCA by putting their weight behind it and not derailing the project with unnecessarily long trials or unreasonable ASQRs.

Guru Kota announced in Hamara Tejas Ep-3 that this is his transition plan to desi birds:
  • Su-30 >> AMCA
  • Mig-21 >> LCA Mk1
  • Mig-29, Mirage-2000, Jaguar >> MWF
Hoping IAF adopts this wholeheartedly. Though I suspect this is the service's wish list:
  • Su-30 >> AMCA/Su-57/Su-75
  • Mig-21 >> LCA Mk1 + Mk2
  • Mig-29, Mirage-2000, Jaguar >> Rafale
IAF does want more Rafale.

Previously IAF was betting upon fgfa to hold the front line till AMCA was developed.
But after failure of fgfa IAF needs Rafale to hold the front line against chinese j20 and porkistani copy of j31/ f15 upgrades.

Can't blame them really. MWF will be very potent jet but will take time to mature.

Maturity means being integrated with all kinds of weaponary , being tested thoroughly in multiple excercises. Having developed combat doctrine suitable to jet and IAF. Having fully equipped squadrons with experienced pilots.

All these could take 3-4 years even after production of jets.

Meanwhile Rafale is a mature , combat tested platform today and can fight today.
 

MonaLazy

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
827
Likes
4,860
MWF is evolved form of mk1a. It is true form of lca program.
Then it should be the type inducted into IAF in large numbers like the F-16 to USAF- more than the 272 MKI.

Pilots are loving mk1a already but our philosophy of war has changed . We are no longer just a defencive airforces but we need a airforce which can punish enemy deep inside.

That's why those 800+ migs are being replaced by su30mki , Rafale and later MWF.
If that is true- have to ruefully add that is a shifting of goalposts by IAF. LCA was designed as a mig-21 replacement- which was shamefully called a flying coffin/widowmaker. On all counts, especially it's stellar safety record- the LCA is way ahead of mig-21.

MWF can carry enough payload deep inside enemy land for penetration strike while being equipped with self protection jammers , maws etc. Mk1a can't to deep penetration against china.

Hence MWF is required and not more mk1a.
Let's look at Pakistan and China in isolation- despite the two front war rhetoric they present diametrically different challenges. For Pakistan- most of its economic/militarily juicy targets are within 200 km of Indian border- mostly in Punjab, few in Sindh- rest of it is just insurgency or terrorist hot bed where the cost of the missile runs higher than the target it is seeking to destroy. Do we need deep penetration for Pakistan? A Mk1A armed with a standoff weapon fired from a few km inside Pakistan will do the job.

China presents a whole different problem. All of its economic hubs are on its eastern seaboard. How will a Rafale taking off from Hashimara drop a bomb on Shanghai?

1638641303126.png



That's 3154.02 kms one way & Rafale has a combat radius of 780-km to 1,650-km depending on the mission. Don't think it can be refuelled in enemy air space. If it is not possible for one Rafale, how will 126 make a difference?

To threaten Chinese soft underbelly in the initial days of war we need to look at a B-21 type solution. In later days may be Su-30 + extended range Brahmos/Nirbhay.


 
Last edited:

Rajaraja Chola

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
513
Likes
1,456
Country flag
I see no MRFA thread so I'll post about it here since I guess it will affect Mk2 more than Mk1 or AMCA.


It appears that SAAB has put in a preemptive bid for MRFA involving helping on the Mk2 and AMCA programmes.

Would it be a good idea to accept this offer? I think it might. India has failed to manage the Tejas and Kaveri programmes. There appears to be no interest in changing 'the system' for the better in India. Bringing a foreign player in to get things done seems a good idea to me.

Apart from actually getting aircraft produced to start providing the IAF with fighters to bolster the defence of India, SAAB may be able to make a valuable contribution to solving AMCA development problems. SAAB's production expertise would definitely benefit Mk2 and AMCA production as well IMO.

Says in the video that SAAB can supply Gripen E at around half the cost of Rafale.
Lol. They need to bid for what is asked for. Any unrelated materials will be expunged or worst will see them lose the tender.

And what would Saab help us? We already have the Mission computers, FCS, radars, some avionics etc along with test labs and fixture jigs. We even have our own EW warfare suite though not sure if it would be better than what Saab is offering.

The only thing where they can help us (maybe) is composites provided it's better than us, EW suites, possibly advanced radars and project management. Why the hell should India pay 150000k usd PA for an Swedish based project manager (very low estimate) when anyone can be hired at one third the cost in India itself.

They don't have missiles, engine that would benefit us. It's total blow air.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,395
Likes
33,493
Country flag
Then it should be the type inducted into IAF in large numbers like the F-16 to USAF- more than the 272 MKI.



If that is true- have to ruefully add that is a shifting of goalposts by IAF. LCA was designed as a mig-21 replacement- which was shamefully called a flying coffin/widowmaker. On all counts, especially it's stellar safety record- the LCA is way ahead of mig-21.



Let's look at Pakistan and China in isolation- despite the two front war rhetoric they present diametrically different challenges. For Pakistan- most of its economic/militarily juicy targets are within 200 km of Indian border- mostly in Punjab, few in Sindh- rest of it is just insurgency or terrorist hot bed where the cost of the missile runs higher than the target it is seeking to destroy. Do we need deep penetration for Pakistan? A Mk1A armed with a standoff weapon fired from a few km inside Pakistan will do the job.

China presents a whole different problem. All of its economic hubs are on its eastern seaboard. How will a Rafale taking off from Hashimara drop a bomb on Shanghai?

View attachment 123240


That's 3154.02 kms one way & Rafale has a combat radius of 780-km to 1,650-km depending on the mission. Don't think it can be refuelled in enemy air space. If it is not possible for one Rafale, how will 126 make a difference?

To threaten Chinese soft underbelly in the initial days of war we need to look at a B-21 type solution. In later days may be Su-30 + extended range Brahmos/Nirbhay.


The problem is not the depth of Pakistan but that we have limited forward bases. Basing mk1a there and we can only hit inside pakistan but base MWF there and we can hit inside both pakistan and china.

Deep penetration into china doesn't mean hitting Shanghai. It means hitting infrastructure in Tibet to disrupt pla supply chain and forcing them on backfoot by destroying roads , depots and railways.

Also in case of two active fronts MWF can swing from chinese frontier to pakistan frontier and reverse if need be during a single flight while mk1a will have to refuel , land for that .

Yes MWF will see large numbers. I'm guessing 150-200 . Taking together with lca total numbers will surpass that of su30mki.

Lca and MWF will be backbone of Indian Air force for next 3 decades.

Even if we maintain just 700 combat jets in future ( 40 squadrons) that's means replacing almost 350 jets every 20 years to keep forces relatively modern.

We don't have money to import 350 jets. It's only possible with indeginous solution otherwise numbers will go down.
 

Shashank Nayak

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
4,013
Likes
13,825
Country flag
Then it should be the type inducted into IAF in large numbers like the F-16 to USAF- more than the 272 MKI.



If that is true- have to ruefully add that is a shifting of goalposts by IAF. LCA was designed as a mig-21 replacement- which was shamefully called a flying coffin/widowmaker. On all counts, especially it's stellar safety record- the LCA is way ahead of mig-21.



Let's look at Pakistan and China in isolation- despite the two front war rhetoric they present diametrically different challenges. For Pakistan- most of its economic/militarily juicy targets are within 200 km of Indian border- mostly in Punjab, few in Sindh- rest of it is just insurgency or terrorist hot bed where the cost of the missile runs higher than the target it is seeking to destroy. Do we need deep penetration for Pakistan? A Mk1A armed with a standoff weapon fired from a few km inside Pakistan will do the job.

China presents a whole different problem. All of its economic hubs are on its eastern seaboard. How will a Rafale taking off from Hashimara drop a bomb on Shanghai?

View attachment 123240


That's 3154.02 kms one way & Rafale has a combat radius of 780-km to 1,650-km depending on the mission. Don't think it can be refuelled in enemy air space. If it is not possible for one Rafale, how will 126 make a difference?

To threaten Chinese soft underbelly in the initial days of war we need to look at a B-21 type solution. In later days may be Su-30 + extended range Brahmos/Nirbhay.


The only plausible way is having SSGNs that can fire Kalibre class cruise missile, at China's economic centers, from South/ east China sea..
Currently long range cruise missiles can threaten the Chinese Megacity of Chengdu.. from the Northeast.. It is less than 1000 km from India's border in the north east..
 

flanker99

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
569
Likes
3,095
Country flag
The only plausible way is having SSGNs that can fire Kalibre class cruise missile, at China's economic centers, from South/ east China sea..
Currently long range cruise missiles can threaten the Chinese Megacity of Chengdu.. from the Northeast.. It is less than 1000 km from India's border in the north east..
We will need a sizeable no of SSGN's to actually threaten them with enough no of missile.
This is why I think HGV's,HCM's are must for india
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,395
Likes
33,493
Country flag
The only plausible way is having SSGNs that can fire Kalibre class cruise missile, at China's economic centers, from South/ east China sea..
Currently long range cruise missiles can threaten the Chinese Megacity of Chengdu.. from the Northeast.. It is less than 1000 km from India's border in the north east..
While cruise missiles are sexy they don't really win wars. This narrative of bombarding cities with cruise missiles is totally irrelevant to how wars are won.

A major nation like china or india isn't even going to flinch by cruise missiles on cities. London faced thousands of V2 missile in world war and kept going on.

To defeat china we need to focus on destroying all connecting links between mainland and Tibet while simultaneously blocking Malacca. Thanks to geography of Tibet only a few routes exist between mainland and Tibet. Those will be target of our Cruise missiles and jets penetration strikes.

Chinese can keep throwing cruise missiles at Delhi they'll be good for propaganda and panic but won't actually do anything to change the course of a real war.
 

Shashank Nayak

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
4,013
Likes
13,825
Country flag
While cruise missiles are sexy they don't really win wars. This narrative of bombarding cities with cruise missiles is totally irrelevant to how wars are won.

A major nation like china or india isn't even going to flinch by cruise missiles on cities. London faced thousands of V2 missile in world war and kept going on.

To defeat china we need to focus on destroying all connecting links between mainland and Tibet while simultaneously blocking Malacca. Thanks to geography of Tibet only a few routes exist between mainland and Tibet. Those will be target of our Cruise missiles and jets penetration strikes.

Chinese can keep throwing cruise missiles at Delhi they'll be good for propaganda and panic but won't actually do anything to change the course of a real war.
The fact that London braved the NAZI air and missile onslaught does not mean, that India will overcome a similar Chinese onslaught.. WW2 is from another era, when there was very little value attached to human life.. Considering how many High value targets like BABUs and bureaucrats, and politicians and their children, Stay in Delhi.. There will be enormous pressure on GOI to surrender to Chinese.. After all presence of HVTs on IC814, and dharna by relatives did have an impact on Bhajipao government of Vajpayee during IC814 fiasco..
Note : All of India's wars since 1947 combined have resulted in less than 10,000 Indian military deaths.. Compare that to 50 lakh German soldiers killed in WW2.
The Indian elite have never been tested like the British elite were tested during WW2, and they most probably won't hold up against the psychological pressure of continuous bombardment of the Capital of Delhi..
 
Last edited:

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,395
Likes
33,493
Country flag
The fact that London braved the NAZI air and missile onslaught does not mean, that India will overcome a similar Chinese onslaught.. WW2 is from another era, when there was very little value attached to human life.. Considering how many High value targets like BABUs and bureaucrats, and politicians and their children, Stay in Delhi.. There will be enormous pressure on GOI to surrender to Chinese.. After all presence of HVTs on IC814, and dharna by relatives did have an impact on Bhajipao government of Vajpayee during IC814 fiasco..
Note : All of India's wars since 1947 combined have resulted in less than 10,000 Indian military deaths.. Compare that to 50 lakh German soldiers killed in WW2.
The Indian elite have never been tested like the British elite were tested during WW2, and they most probably won't hold up against the psychological pressure of continuous bombardment of the Capital of Delhi..
Yup there will be enormous psychological pressure. But if give in to that we have already lost. Do you think attacking Shanghai would reduce that pressure in delhi?? I don't think so.
 

Shashank Nayak

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
4,013
Likes
13,825
Country flag
Yup there will be enormous psychological pressure. But if give in to that we have already lost. Do you think attacking Shanghai would reduce that pressure in delhi?? I don't think so.
Attacking Shanghai would definitely up the morale of the the Indian public.. Seeing dead Chinese in Shanghai, would soothe Indians after seeing dead Delhiites.. and hit the aura of invulnerability that Master Xi has tried to create. (The Chinese would think.. Like if a poor state like india can bomb Shanghai, what would Uncle Sam Do ? )
The Chinese believe in Total war, so, India should always be ready for Delhi to be bombed, and inturn atleast continuously hit Chengdu..
 

Abdus Salem killed

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
2,486
Likes
9,818
Attacking Shanghai would definitely up the morale of the the Indian public.. Seeing dead Chinese in Shanghai, would soothe Indians after seeing dead Delhiites.. and hit the aura of invulnerability that Master Xi has tried to create. (The Chinese would think.. Like if a poor state like india can bomb Shanghai, what would Uncle Sam Do ? )
The Chinese believe in Total war, so, India should always be ready for Delhi to be bombed, and inturn atleast continuously hit Chengdu..
Completely right the Chinese consider themselves god not to be killed by mortals a single dead Chinese pla pic would haunt them they understand nothing but force
 
Last edited:

Spitfire9

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
822
Likes
2,290
Country flag
Lol. They need to bid for what is asked for. Any unrelated materials will be expunged or worst will see them lose the tender.

And what would Saab help us? We already have the Mission computers, FCS, radars, some avionics etc along with test labs and fixture jigs. We even have our own EW warfare suite though not sure if it would be better than what Saab is offering.

The only thing where they can help us (maybe) is composites provided it's better than us, EW suites, possibly advanced radars and project management. Why the hell should India pay 150000k usd PA for an Swedish based project manager (very low estimate) when anyone can be hired at one third the cost in India itself.

They don't have missiles, engine that would benefit us. It's total blow air.
Of course SAAB will be ahead in some areas technologically. The main area in which SAAB could help is in production knowhow IMO. India is pretty useless at producing fighter aircraft. I think that SAAB, Dassault, Boeing, LM, BAE know how to organise production far more effectively. If India knows how to do it, how come India has not done it? You say you have project managers available in India. That's good. What is bad is that Indian project management has been a failure. That is one reason why you have made <40 Tejas in 10 years.

PS I mentioned SAAB because it was SAAB that was reported to being offering help.
 

FactsPlease

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2016
Messages
113
Likes
219
Country flag
Of course SAAB will be ahead in some areas technologically. The main area in which SAAB could help is in production knowhow IMO. India is pretty useless at producing fighter aircraft. I think that SAAB, Dassault, Boeing, LM, BAE know how to organise production far more effectively. If India knows how to do it, how come India has not done it? You say you have project managers available in India. That's good. What is bad is that Indian project management has been a failure. That is one reason why you have made <40 Tejas in 10 years.

PS I mentioned SAAB because it was SAAB that was reported to being offering help.
You rightly address on one key matter - why that slow Tejas production rate (other than conspiracy theory that IAF learning how IA did to Arjun - regardless how in this forum everyone favor Tejas).

Nevertheless, I would love to know exactly what you meant by "know-how in organizing production", that Boeing & gangs have and we do NOT. I hold doubt on this but am willing to heard further elaboration, please.
 

Rajaraja Chola

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
513
Likes
1,456
Country flag
Of course SAAB will be ahead in some areas technologically. The main area in which SAAB could help is in production knowhow IMO. India is pretty useless at producing fighter aircraft. I think that SAAB, Dassault, Boeing, LM, BAE know how to organise production far more effectively. If India knows how to do it, how come India has not done it? You say you have project managers available in India. That's good. What is bad is that Indian project management has been a failure. That is one reason why you have made <40 Tejas in 10 years.

PS I mentioned SAAB because it was SAAB that was reported to being offering help.
What is production know how. That is what I meant we have ability to design our own test jigs and fixtures. If you want to blame someone, it's the GoI.
Even before F35 production began, it's IOC version (minus missiles) had an order of 2000+. Beat that. LM target is 48pm with initial 36pm right now. Whopping 400+ F35 in a year. On a order of 40 with no future orders given till 2021, there is no imperative to "organise" production. Be happy we would be getting 16 pa.
There is a separate files called DFM, but that thing come in when the AC is designed to ensure the parts chosen are manufacturable. India is learning her trade now. We will do better in the future. But for AmCA it should be purely Indian driven effort.
 

Javelin_Sam

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
629
Country flag
Production rate is always a function of number of orders. For a mere 40 mk1 order, HAL cannot deliver 36 in one year and 4 in next month, shut the line and ask the skilled workforce to go home and come back after Mk1a or MK2 order is placed. They will stretch it till further orders are placed and work on next type begins. Given the 83 mk1a, they will not deliver 40 per year and shut line after 2 years and go tripping till additional orders of mk1a or mk2 is placed. They have a fair idea of timelines as to when will future orders will come. They will stretch it too. HAL doesn't need the help of Swedish farts for 'aircraft-production 101.'
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
8,395
Likes
33,493
Country flag
Of course SAAB will be ahead in some areas technologically. The main area in which SAAB could help is in production knowhow IMO. India is pretty useless at producing fighter aircraft. I think that SAAB, Dassault, Boeing, LM, BAE know how to organise production far more effectively. If India knows how to do it, how come India has not done it? You say you have project managers available in India. That's good. What is bad is that Indian project management has been a failure. That is one reason why you have made <40 Tejas in 10 years.

PS I mentioned SAAB because it was SAAB that was reported to being offering help.
India is producing 8 lca + 12 su30mki per year. That's 20 for a year. How many is saab producing per year ??

If less then 20 then answer why saab is so stupid backward organization. Why can't sweeden find good managers?? Why can't they manage high production rates??

France is producing Rafale since 1986. Till date only 237 Rafale are produced. That means only 6 per year. So I guess france is useless in managing fighter jet production?? Perhaps they should let HAL do it atleast they will get to 20 per year .lol.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

Articles

Top