IAF should stop cribbing about LCA Tejas
Is Indian Tejas I fighter a failure or a success? Both. If we go by the Indian Air Force's specification, Tejas fails. But if we go by the level of technology mastery India has achieved, the aircraft is a success. The IAF's rejection of the Tejas on grounds of not meeting requirements is a red herring, invalid, and irrelevant.
The IAF has forgotten that it has never operated with top-of-the line fighters. In 1949 the Vampire entered the IAF service, at the same time as the NextGen F-86 started with the USAF. The Hunter was inducted around 1956, the NextGen F-100 was already in US service.
The MiG-21 arrived in 1965, but the US F-104, a much more advanced aircraft, was in service in 1960. The Su-7 entered IAF service in 1968, but the very much more advanced F-105 entered service in 1958. The MiG-23 arrived in service in 1980, the far superior F-16 entered service two years before. The Mirage 2000 entered our service ten years after the F-16 operationalised. The MiG-29 came into our service in 1985, the F-18 in 1983.
Also read - Why LCA is not all that bad for India
We got the Su-30 in 1997, but the F-18 was a match for it. We will get our stealth fighters later in the decade, yet the USAF's F-22 entered service in 2005. Even with Rafale, had it come through, we'd be 20 years behind the F-35.
We have always been behind the curve on the most of the capable aircrafts, and obviously so: we have never had the money, quite aside from political factors. We made do with what we could afford. There was no question of the best.
Yet all of a sudden, the IAF is rejecting Tejas I because it is not the best. Does the IAF realise that if it got Rafale, it would still not be the best but an entire generation behind the F-35?
We immediately need 20 fighter squadrons to fill our 45 combat squadron requirement. Including attrition and war wastage reserves, that means 500 aircraft. At Dassault's current lifecycle cost, that is $150-billion plus, four times India's current defence budget. And once Dassault had us hooked, the price would rise inexorably.
Also read - LCA Tejas: High time we move on
Next point: what IAF requirements does Tejas not fulfil? The engine and electronics are world class, if only because they are imported. The airframe is as good as what anyone not in a position to buy Western fighters can get. Agreed, the Tejas is not a Typhoon or a Rafale. But it is not supposed to be!
Tejas is a replacement for the hordes of MiG-21s we had/have. Agreed, the Swedish J-39 is a beautiful plane and as a fighter likely has better performance than the Rafale. But 500 J-39s will cost $100 plus billion lifecycle. Do we advertise for sugar daddies to buy it for us? Because we surely cannot afford it on our own!
We could, if the ministry of finance and the government would wake up and allot a proper percentage of the GDP to defence. Can anyone count on this happening? It would be foolish to assume so.
An analogy: I need - really need - a new PC to replace the El Cheapo $300 model with 4GB RAM that I have had for years. My productivity takes a serious hit every single day. I need an Apple MacBook Air costing $2500. But can I afford that? No way. So I bash on with my $300 PC, and use a $164 Google Chromebook for my laptop. There's no need for further discussion because there is no way I can do better. My whining on about my "requirements" is of zero interest to anyone. Ditto, IAF and Tejas.
Also read - Modi sarkar's $51-bn defence budget is not good enough for India's security
Admiral Gorshkov, the father of the modern Soviet Navy used to say: Better is the enemy of good enough. This seemingly simple formulation is, in reality, deeply profound. The IAF, please tattoo this adage on your forehead so you see it every time you look in a mirror.