Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sir, The timeline is realistic and same for other aircraft around the world, Most design operating now were conceived back in late 80s or early 90s and still not perfect, The prototype of Indian Tejas fighter only develop and flew just 15 years back ..

Sir, participation of Pvt sector was always in and in the big way, It is always welcomed if they make the serial production but not R&D ..

@Kunal

If it takes 32 years to produce an aircraft, there has to be a 'continuous development'. After all, tactics, strategy and weapon configuration and improvement around the world cannot stand still in a 'time wrap' for India to develop an aircraft and then move on.

Now that there will be competition from the Private sector, the DRDO will wake up and produce or perish. No more will they get the huge funding nor the patronage of a doting Govt that will sit and whistle in a time standstill for the favourable wind to blow.

==============

I belive the actual work only started not more than 15 years ago, We know about lobby paid media and almost all of the lies are being broken in very thread of DFI ..

There is a intense dalal lobby in india trying to scuttle our Indigenious efforts.Some of the behaviours of the journalist,retired generals,few forum mebers tend to strngthen that belief.

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

In 1969, the Indian government accepted the recommendation by its Aeronautics Committee that Hindustan Aeronautics Limited should design and develop a fighter aircraft around a proven engine. Based on a 'Tactical Air Support Aircraft' ASR markedly similar to that for the Marut.

HAL completed design studies in 1975, but the project fell through due to inability to procure the selected "proven engine" from a foreign manufacturer and the IAF's requirement for an air superiority fighter with secondary air support and interdiction capability remained unfulfilled.

In 1983, IAF realised the need for development of an Indian combat aircraft for two primary purposes. The principal and most obvious goal was the development of a replacement aircraft for India's ageing MiG-21 fighters. The MiG-21 has been the mainstay of the Indian Air Force since the 1970s. The "Long Term Re-Equipment Plan 1981" noted that the MiG-21s would be approaching the end of their service lives by the mid-1990s, and that by 1995, the IAF would lack 40% of the aircraft needed to fill its projected force structure requirements.

The IAF's Air Staff Requirement for the LCA were not finalised until October 1985. This delay rendered moot the original schedule which called for first flight in April 1990 and service entry in 1995; however, it also proved a boon as it gave the ADA time to better marshal national R&D and industrial resources, recruit personnel, create infrastructure, and to gain a clearer perspective of which advanced technologies could be developed locally and which would need to be imported.

Out of a total of 35 major avionics components and line-replaceable units (LRUs), only three involve foreign systems. These are the multi-function displays (MFDs) by Sextant (France) and Elbit (Israel), the helmet-mounted display and sight (HMDS) cueing system by Elbit, and the laser pod supplied by Rafael (Israel).

However, even among these three, when the LCA reaches the production stage, the MFDs are expected to be supplied by Indian companies. A few other important items of equipment (such as the Martin-Baker ejection seat) have been imported. As a consequence of the embargo imposed on India after its nuclear weapons tests in May 1998, many items originally planned to be imported were instead developed locally. The nuclear test sanctions delayed the development of technologies that were already many years behind schedule.

More at
HAL Tejas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Pulkit]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Finally!

And sadly it cannot yet fire long-range missiles or be capable of undergoing mid-air refuelling to double its strike range.

As usual, foremost in credit seeking but actually producing and presenting a half completed effective weapons platform.

The points you are raising are all true..
You are quite senior and experienced to countering you is not in my power ....
but i will try and reason with you.

How many times the requirements have been changed?

All the tests are sequencetial you cannot go to 100 directly....can we?

The IAF did a very rigid testing of the aircraft and that takes time....
They were not ready to leave any rock unturned in killing this project(my view).

You now have a machine in air finally "acceptable" to IAF (unwilling) ....

No one wanted to push Tejas down to IAF but they did everything to defame it....Half cooked product is not for IAF to use... But if they are living in denial they need to be brought to light....
The DRDO ADA HAL IAF all are equally responsible for what so ever state Tejas is in at present....

If you evaluate Tejas today then also you will see that Tejas does fit our requirement and with time it will meet all of them....


The concept phase of MKII will meet all the Demands of IAF( conditional...they dont change them once again....)
....

Sir, There are continues development of a fighter program, The achievements in due time are simply installed in present aircraft under service ..

It means when In flight refueling will get its certifications, It will be installed in existing fighters same for Beyond visual range missiles which is Astra MK1 ..

The following above is general for any other fighter under developed by any nation, In due time it get maturity ..

==============

Under present condition the Tejas can strike beyond 500kms and have ability to conduct dog fights, In span of a year it will able to shoot BVRs ..

I believe all these factors should have been covered earlier....
Could they have or not addressed them earlier....

specially on the issue of the parts to be acquired from foreign vender who are playing these cards to derail it again??

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Earlier government were busy cutting DRDO man power as well as fund for infrastructure to divert towards imports ..

Lack of Man power and Infrastructure is major reason for all kind of delays ..

I believe all these factors should have been covered earlier....
Could they have or not addressed them earlier....

specially on the issue of the parts to be acquired from foreign vender who are playing these cards to derail it again??

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sir, The timeline is realistic and same for other aircraft around the world, Most design operating now were conceived back in late 80s or early 90s and still not perfect, The prototype of Indian Tejas fighter only develop and flew just 15 years back ..

Sir, participation of Pvt sector was always in and in the big way, It is always welcomed if they make the serial production but not R&D ..



==============

I belive the actual work only started not more than 15 years ago, We know about lobby paid media and almost all of the lies are being broken in very thread of DFI ..

Let us see the development of the Focke Wulf Fw 190 designed by Kurt Tank, the same person who designed HF 24.

In autumn 1937, the German Ministry of Aviation asked various designers for a new fighter to fight alongside the Messerschmitt Bf 109, Germany's front line fighter. Although the Bf 109 was an extremely competitive fighter, the Ministry of Aviation was worried that future foreign designs might outclass it, and wanted to have new aircraft under development to meet these possible challenges.

Kurt Tank responded with a number of designs, most incorporating liquid-cooled inline engines. However, it was not until a design was presented using the air-cooled, 14-cylinder BMW 139 radial engine that the Ministry of Aviation's interest was aroused.

Fw 190 was introduced (was in operation) on the Western Front in August 1941.

Thus, design after 1937 and operational mid 1941


You may also check the timeframe of the development of HF 24 (a totally indigenous fighter).

Design work started 1957 and prototype flew in 1961.

HF 24 entered service in 1967

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=366


In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, some Maruts and Hawker Hunter aircraft were used to give close support to an Indian border post in the decisive Battle of Longewala, on the morning of 5 December 1971.

One aerial kill recorded by Marut flown by Sqn Ldr KK Bakshi of 220 Squadron shot down a PAF F-86 Sabre on 7 Dec 71 (Flg Offr Hamid Khwaja of 15 Squadron PAF) showing its mettle in dog fight as the aircraft was primarily conceived as ground attack fighter.

 

[power_monger]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Isn't the various jet fighter development timelines discussed to death in LCA threads previously?The Legendary F-22 development was stretched over 20 years.And this is after US companies having tons of experience in buiding jet fighters,complete test facilities,thousands of skilled manpower and billions of money.

 

[power_monger]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

mods - dupliacte post.please delete it.

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Isn't the various jet fighter development timelines discussed to death in LCA threads previously?

Yes, but a refreshing of memories becomes a must.

If HF 24, an indigenous aircraft from the same stable (HAL) could do it as follows:

Design work started 1957 and prototype flew in 1961.

HF 24 entered service in 1967

then 32 years for Tejas is indeed astonishing.

The arms lobbies were active when the HF 24 was visualised, and more so, since there was no checks on the agents, who could visit the Defence Ministry and the Development people at will.

And, when there are so many checks now, to include ban on agents coming to the Ministry or the Military HQs, why keep up the excuses of 'arms lobbies' at work?

They were and even now are at work. But still, the HF 24 was made in such a short timeframe.

Unless we introspect, we can never progress.

It is most unfortunate that we take accountability so lightly.

Yes, that the LCA has fructified is a matter of joy, but let us not in that joy overlook the shortcomings.

We are producing naval vessels (totally indigenous) for export. So our infrastructure is not that lousy.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sir, Making a Radial engine powered Aircraft back in 1940s is very different from making a 4.5 generation Jet like Eurofighter Typhoon, Gripen and Rafale which will fall in same technological era as Tejas ..

As for HF 24, It was a redesign Aircraft by HAL originally designed by Kurt Tank, Hence the development was faster, But after when HF-24 was killed, HAL was prevented from making any aircraft rather, India went for import and India lose its design capability ..

If you really need to see their timeline and funds allocated you can judge for yourself ..

================

Rafale : Design started in mid-1970s, Prototype made during 1984, Operational service in December 1992, Project cost US$62.7 billion

EF-2000 : Design started in late 1970s, Prototype made during 1994, operational service in 2003, Project cost including production 152868750.00 US Dollar

Gripen : Design started in 1979, Prototype made during 1988, operational service in 1997, Project cost US$"¯13.54 billion

Tejas : Design started in 1980, Prototype made during 2001, operational service in 2013, Project cost US$1.2 billion

Source Wiki as yours, Sir ..

===================

None of above aircraft were operational as 100% combat ready, They are always under upgrade to meet future thread, In other words they are always running under research ..

Let us see the development of the Focke Wulf Fw 190 designed by Kurt Tank, the same person who designed HF 24.

In autumn 1937, the German Ministry of Aviation asked various designers for a new fighter to fight alongside the Messerschmitt Bf 109, Germany's front line fighter. Although the Bf 109 was an extremely competitive fighter, the Ministry of Aviation was worried that future foreign designs might outclass it, and wanted to have new aircraft under development to meet these possible challenges.

Kurt Tank responded with a number of designs, most incorporating liquid-cooled inline engines. However, it was not until a design was presented using the air-cooled, 14-cylinder BMW 139 radial engine that the Ministry of Aviation's interest was aroused.

Fw 190 was introduced (was in operation) on the Western Front in August 1941.

Yes, but a refreshing of memories becomes a must.

If HF 24, an indigenous aircraft from the same stable (HAL) could do it as follows:


then 32 years for Tejas is indeed astonishing.

The arms lobbies were active since there was no check.

When there are so many checks now, why keep up the excuses?

Unless we introspect, we can never progress.

It is most unfortunate that we take accountability so lightly.

Yes, that the LCA has fructified is a matter of joy, but let us not in that joy overlook the shortcomings.

We are producing naval vessels (totally indigenous) for export. So our infrastructure is not that lousy.

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sir, Making a Radial engine powered Aircraft back in 1940s is very different from making a 4.5 generation Jet like Eurofighter Typhoon, Gripen and Rafale which will fall in same technological era as Tejas ..

If you really need to see their timeline and funds allocated you can judge for yourself ..

================

Rafale : Design started in mid-1970s, Prototype made during 1984, Operational service in December 1992, Project cost US$62.7 billion

EF-2000 : Design started in late 1970s, Prototype made during 1994, operational service in 2003, Project cost including production 152868750.00 US Dollar

Gripen : Design started in 1979, Prototype made during 1988, operational service in 1997, Project cost US$"¯13.54 billion

Tejas : Design started in 1980, Prototype made during 2001, operational service in 2013, Project cost US$1.2 billion

Source Wiki as yours, Sir ..

===================

None of above aircraft were operational as 100% combat ready, They are always under upgrade to meet future thread, In other words they are always running under research ..

You must realise they (Fw 190) were modern for their times and in fact, they were innovative and ahead of the contemporary times.

And Germany was facing sanction and huge restrictions under the Treaty of Versailles.

Along with its well-known counterpart, the Messerschmitt Bf 109, the Fw 190 became the backbone of the Luftwaffe's Jagdwaffe (Fighter Force). The twin-row BMW 801 radial engine that powered most operational versions enabled the Fw 190 to lift larger loads than the Bf 109, allowing its use as a day fighter, fighter-bomber, ground-attack aircraft and, to a lesser degree, night fighter.

The Fw 190A started flying operationally over France in August 1941, and quickly proved superior in all but turn radius to the Royal Air Force's main front-line fighter, the Spitfire Mk. V

Also an aircraft without the correct weapon mix for which it is expected to perform operationally, is no weapon platform. it becomes a technology demonstrator.

Of course, there will be improvements. They are called 'Variants'.

Compare Tejas with the examples you have given.

Mig 21s were not replaced because of the cry 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'.

How many lives were lost because of this cry 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'?

Lives are not important?

And is MIG 21 and its Variants operational competitive with the aircraft used by our adversaries?

While there is no doubt that Arms Lobbies work, but it cannot be used like "Cry Wolf' of an excuse for shoddiness, lethargy and lacklustre approach.

How long has Arihant taken?

Submarines are equally technologically challenging as aircraft, if not more.

Wiki with reliable footnotes to back up the contention is as good as the original source. More of a précis.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sir, Same applicable for Tejas, If you doubt please do ask me questions ..

Sir, They are upgrade under fancy names

You must realise they were modern in their times and in fact, they were innovative and ahead of the contemporary times.

Of course, there will be improvements. They are called 'Variants'.

==============

Sir, Air-force is itself responsible for death of their own pilots, Tejas back in 2013 were more than MIG-21 bis in service but no major orders rather IAF want MIG-21 to be functional till 2022 ..

Mig 21s were not replaced because of the cry 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'.

How many lives were lost because of this cry 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'?

Lives are not important?

 

[power_monger]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Yes, but a refreshing of memories becomes a must.

If HF 24, an indigenous aircraft from the same stable (HAL) could do it as follows:


then 32 years for Tejas is indeed astonishing.

The arms lobbies were active since there was no check.

When there are so many checks now, why keep up the excuses?

Unless we introspect, we can never progress.

firstly 32 years is a lie.you cant build arguments on falsely created statements.You cant construct the development period from when one starts dreaming about it.FSED phase indicates the begining. From that account it is 21 years which is ok considering the timelines of various jet fighters is around 15-20 years, F-22 started in 1986 and was inducted in 2005. raffale took 15 years.(I am not sure of exact timelines here).

And what is that you are Introspecting?

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Sir, Same applicable for Tejas, If you doubt please do ask me questions ..

Sir, They are upgrade under fancy names



==============

Sir, Air-force is itself responsible for death of their own pilots, Tejas back in 2013 were more than MIG-21 bis in service but no major orders rather IAF want MIG-21 to be functional till 2022 ..

That is not true.

The MIG-21 was primarily designed by the Soviet Union to be an "interceptor" aircraft. Which means that as soon as the Air Defense forces of USSR detect approaching enemy fighter or bomber formations, they'd scramble from their bases, gain altitude quickly and attack these targets and destroy them before they could pose a threat to the Soviet homeland.

So the aircraft can climb very fast and has very limited onboard equipment. As per Soviet doctrine, these aircrafts would be guided to their targets by ground controllers using ground based radars. But considering the spate of Soviet pilots defecting to the west in their fighters, the Soviet designers "deliberately" designed the MIG-21 with a very small wing span and very less fuel capacity to limit their range. The controls are also designed for short missions. This was to disuade pilots from traversing the vastness of the soviet airspace.

However this has made this aircraft very very difficult to operate. Its inherent instabilty and other design aspects makes it the aircraft with the "highest landing speed" in IAF. In other words, you have to travel at a much higher speed while landing this aircraft than you would, in others. Also the log delas in India's LCA Tejas, designed to replace these MIG-21's has forced the IAF to keep these aircrafts, dubbed as "flying coffins" in service for an additional 2 years. Perhaps you can also throw in additional factors like lack of spares and poor maintenance into the basket.

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

firstly 32 years is a lie.you cant build arguments on falsely created statements.You cant construct the development period from when one starts dreaming about it.FSED phase indicates the begining. From that account it is 21 years which is ok considering the timelines of various jet fighters is around 15-20 years, F-22 started in 1986 and was inducted in 2005. raffale took 15 years.(I am not sure of exact timelines here).

And what is that you are Introspecting?

You better not use the word 'lie' so loosely with me.

I use links and not talk through my hat, old chap.

Links are not 'lies'. They are comments based on reports and research and then the articles are written.

Not the meandering of a wandering mind as yours.

You have not worked with development and so you can claim GSQRs to be 'dreaming of'

GSQRs are the 'dreams' (if you will) on which development starts.

In India, development does not start on its own.

I have seen how GSQR develops and even if the Military wants the moon, the DRDO should tell them where to get off. The DRDO doesn't and instead gives more fanciers ideas and telling the military that there is no problem to do what the Military want and more.

So, don't lecture me or hide behind the hackneyed and overworked cliché 'arms lobby'.

I am introspection that if HF 24. Arihant, etc can take off on a tight timeframe, why cannot HAL, which has a longer history of designing military aircraft and have done it before than the naval shipyards?

 

[Pulkit]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

You better not use the word 'lie' so loosely with me.

I use links and not talk through my hat, old chap.

Links are not 'lies'. They are comments based on reports and research and then the articles are written.

Not the meandering of a wandering mind as yours.

I also might not agree with the time span with you ... but i do agree its quite close to the three decades... but while sharing that information have you also accounted for the expenditure made in comparison to the other foreign projects....


I also request you to respond...

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

I also might not agree with the time span with you ... but i do agree its quite close to the three decades... but while sharing that information have you also accounted for the expenditure made in comparison to the other foreign projects....


I also request you to respond...

If you pay for peanuts, you get peanuts.

Also dollars and Rupees is comparing chalk to cheese.

The ancillaries are Indian.

It is because you are not the end user, the timeframe does not matter.

But to be expected to put one's life on the line and not get the right equipment, when your adversary is marching ahead, is very nerve wracking and worrisome.

And then when you get the indigenous variety that held up your getting the right equipment at the right time, and then find it does not match up, it is sheer disappointing.

It is like the disappointment that follows buying a car based on the hype and glossies and then find out that it is a lemon.

Tejas has kept the IAF on the hop and not filling the void and losing lives in the bargain, apart from nit ot being superior to our adversaries or at least at par. It might satisfy you, but not to those who are to defend the skies.

I am a votary for a robust indigenous defence industry, public or private is not of material concern.

HF 24 is a category that fills me with the confidence that we can. It did not work out since we did not have a matching engine and we still do not produce an engine.

India has to be self reliant. But we cannot have this attitude of Jaisa kam, waisa dam and total lethargy.

I have visited many DRDO organisations during my service. I have never seen such a laid back attitude.

Visit Germany and see their work culture. It is so work only oriented that any Indian would go berserk with exhaustion. And yet, though I find it very odd, they take the weekend as if they have just been released from prison and it is time to savour the freedom to the hilt.

 

[Pulkit]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

If you pay for peanuts, you get peanuts.

Also dollars and Rupees is comparing chalk to cheese.

The ancillaries are Indian.

okay so costs is not a factor according to you...
okay....

so you believe ADA DRDO had enough funds....

Sanctions on us also was not a factor responsible?
or was it?

#736 i asked you same thing .plz address them to.....

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

okay so costs is not a factor according to you...
okay....

so you believe ADA DRDO had enough funds....

Sanctions on us also was not a factor responsible?
or was it?

#736 i asked you same thing .plz address them to.....

Defence does not come cheap.

If you want cheap stuff, then you will get cheap defence.

Does DRDO not have adequate funds? Are you suggesting that?

May I ask you a counter question.

You want to build a house. Do you not check if you have the money or organise for that much of money? Or do you start ordering the house to be built on mere speculative assumption that money will come your way?

Any project that is contemplated has to have a cost analysis and presented to the Govt with vetting by all concerned. Then, and then alone, is the project sanctioned.

Sanctions affected us only in buying assemblies to retrofit.

But then do we lack scientists, technicians, brains to not build things ourselves or have we no confidence in ourselves.

Germany was under sanctions and the most crippling clauses of the Treaty of Versailles, and yet they produced war machines that were innovative and very lethal. Missiles and its technology are what they unleashed on the world and on which today the space explorations are based on.

if they can do, why can't we.

Why must be always take recourse to excuses for our lethargic, laid back approach?

If we are to be a world beater, then we cannot be sleeping and hoping for the favourable wind to blow and do the job for us.

 

[Zebra]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

You must realise they (Fw 190) were modern for their times and in fact, they were innovative and ahead of the contemporary times.

And Germany was facing sanction and huge restrictions under the Treaty of Versailles.

Along with its well-known counterpart, the Messerschmitt Bf 109, the Fw 190 became the backbone of the Luftwaffe's Jagdwaffe (Fighter Force). The twin-row BMW 801 radial engine that powered most operational versions enabled the Fw 190 to lift larger loads than the Bf 109, allowing its use as a day fighter, fighter-bomber, ground-attack aircraft and, to a lesser degree, night fighter.

The Fw 190A started flying operationally over France in August 1941, and quickly proved superior in all but turn radius to the Royal Air Force's main front-line fighter, the Spitfire Mk. V

Also an aircraft without the correct weapon mix for which it is expected to perform operationally, is no weapon platform. it becomes a technology demonstrator.

Of course, there will be improvements. They are called 'Variants'.

Compare Tejas with the examples you have given.

Mig 21s were not replaced because of the cry 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'.

How many lives were lost because of this cry 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'?

Lives are not important?

And is MIG 21 and its Variants operational competitive with the aircraft used by our adversaries?

While there is no doubt that Arms Lobbies work, but it cannot be used like "Cry Wolf' of an excuse for shoddiness, lethargy and lacklustre approach.

How long has Arihant taken?

Submarines are equally technologically challenging as aircraft, if not more.

Wiki with reliable footnotes to back up the contention is as good as the original source. More of a précis.

Sir, who are responsible for 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming' cry?

If I have to answer it, then first IAF and second ex-minister of defence is responsible.

These two people never tried to get Tejas earlier in service.

If there are any shortfalls in the product then they could have improved it in later series productions and can upgrade the old once as well.

But unfortunately it never happened.

Let me ask, ADA/ HAL ordered GE F 414 engines for Mk2s, when they are coming then...?

IAF, MoD, ADA, HAL ever tried to get them earlier as much as they can...? If there are really desperate cry of 'Tejas is coming, Tejas is coming'...!

I don't think any of them even tried, forget about they tried really hard.

'Ram bharose Hindu hotel' is the most suitable description for this situation right now, specially for IAF.

 

[Ray]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

The points you are raising are all true..
You are quite senior and experienced to countering you is not in my power ....
but i will try and reason with you.

How many times the requirements have been changed?

All the tests are sequencetial you cannot go to 100 directly....can we?

The IAF did a very rigid testing of the aircraft and that takes time....
They were not ready to leave any rock unturned in killing this project(my view).

You now have a machine in air finally "acceptable" to IAF (unwilling) ....

No one wanted to push Tejas down to IAF but they did everything to defame it....Half cooked product is not for IAF to use... But if they are living in denial they need to be brought to light....
The DRDO ADA HAL IAF all are equally responsible for what so ever state Tejas is in at present....

If you evaluate Tejas today then also you will see that Tejas does fit our requirement and with time it will meet all of them....


The concept phase of MKII will meet all the Demands of IAF( conditional...they dont change them once again....)
....





I believe all these factors should have been covered earlier....
Could they have or not addressed them earlier....

specially on the issue of the parts to be acquired from foreign vender who are playing these cards to derail it again??

1. If it takes 32 years to have an aircraft from the drawing board to be operational, are you expecting the IAF to stand still at the operational requirements that was valid 32 years ago?
Would it be OK for you to drive a fuel guzzling Ambassador today and not take advantage of the modern cars that are there? Stand still in a timewrap out of sheer nationalism (even though the Ambassador is not an Indian origin vehicle)?

So, as the years of agony of non arrival progresses, would it not be appropriate to ask for changes that would be comparative to the times? And note, these are weapons and not mere feel good toys.

2. Yes, all the tests are sequential. But what of it? Are you suggesting that it should not be so?

3. No one can push substandard stuff to people on whose life such substandard stuff depends. Therefore, your contention that the IAF they did everything to defame it and they are living in denial they need to be brought to light is misplaced and dangerous. Why don't you fly a substandard machine and feel good when it comes crashing down and ending your illustrious life?

Dying in combat for the Nation is one thing Veer Bhogya Vasundhara, but dying for no good reason, just because some people feel that one join the military to die, is a silly way to die, apart from a silly thought.

4. At what would be the time when one will see that Tejas does fit our requirement and with time it will meet all of them.... is the million dollar question. if in the interim, there is a conflict, would it be fine with you that pilots die? If so, then why the hullabaloo over the figures that died for Kargil because the Nation failed them in equipping them?

5. Do you think that the IAF should twiddle their thumbs in glee till the time The concept phase of MKII will meet all the Demands of IAF( conditional...they dont change them once again....)?

Can you guarantee that they will not have to put their lives on the line till then?

if so, fine.

What you do not understand, is that when there will be a war or some reason why they have to put their lives on the line is not an environment that they control. It is the Nation and the govt that controls that environment and it is the Nation and the Govt's responsibility to ensure that they have the wherewithal at the right place and the right place if they are to deliver.