“Guns for Butter”
In the fourth in a five-part series, the IAF assures the Standing Committee on Defense that its fighter fleet is not too diverse and that each different type of fighter has its own use..
Ajai Shukla
Defence News of India, April 1, 2024
As is the case with the Army and Navy, the Indian Air Force (IAF) budget allocations for fiscal year 2022-23 (FY23) are significantly lower than its projections, according to the 36e Report of 17e Lok Sabha Defense Standing Committee.
In five of the past six years, IAF income allocations were 20-42% lower than it expected as its demands for those years.
The picture is even bleaker for IAF capital allocations, in which the IAF received between 40% and 67% less than its planned figure.
As the Ministry of Defense expects the IAF’s order for 123 Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) to galvanize the indigenous aerospace manufacturing ecosystem, the Standing Committee on Defense has asked the IAF if she was comfortable with inducting so many varieties of fighters.
The report quotes an IAF officer who replied: “In each Air Force we will have a mixture of all types of aircraft because each aircraft has a certain role. You cannot have all planes in one class. As for the ACL, it fits. It must be remembered that it was designed to replace the MIG-21. The plane did pretty well. It meets these requirements quite well. Yes, if you ask, everyone would like to have all fifth generation aircraft. But we have to see what we can get, what is available in the market.
The IAF officer also stressed the need to give our own aerospace industry a boost.
“We also have to see what happens tomorrow. If we keep buying [fighter aircraft] of the free market, we will never become self-sufficient. So we also have to give a boost to our own industry. We need to hold their hand and the IAF is committed to that. We are going to make a happy mix and that is why we are looking for an MRFA (multi-role fighter aircraft) contract for 114 aircraft,” the IAF officer said.
Asked about the delays to the LCA project, an IAF representative told the Standing Committee: “The last (fighter) aircraft we designed was the Marut (in the 1950s). So, after a hiatus of more than 30 years, we are now trying to manufacture a fighter aircraft in-house. We have taken a giant step. The LCA is a Generation 4+ aircraft. We could have opted for a third generation aircraft with conventional controls and with rudimentary dials and old avionics but we had to catch up with the (global) technology. It was a very good stage, even if we took more time than we should have.
The IAF officer said it meant overcoming hurdles, but in the end India developed its own design and manufacturing systems.
“We were learning our lessons. We can’t call them failures, but there are a lot of roadblocks. Then the sanctions came after our nuclear test (in 1998). This caused a lot of inconvenience. This is where we started thinking we should have most of the technology in-house. But the electric piloting system of this plane and all the control laws were written by Indians in-house. In avionics, all the architecture is Indian, and it has been completely reviewed once. This means that what we designed in the beginning and what we fly today are two different architectures. The one we’re piloting today is called Federated Architecture. If I can use the word, it is, plug and fly. You can integrate any new weapon or any new system much easier now,” the IAF pilot said.
The Standing Committee demanded an explanation for the sharp drop in this year’s BE projection, compared to the previous year, and was told that this was due to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.
“Our projection last year was Rs. 85,000 crore and we finally got an allocation of Rs. 57,000 crore which we consumed. Ukrainian because some of our deliveries are not taking place. We have already been told that these deliveries will not take place, so we have removed this part of the component, “said the IAF officer.
Table: Revenues and Capital Funding for IAF: Gap Between Supply and Demand
(Figures in crores of rupees)
|
Year |
Income |
Capital |
||||
|
Projection |
Spent |
Miss to win |
Projection |
Spent |
Miss to win |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-19 |
35,261 |
28,291 |
20% |
77,695 |
36,452 |
54% |
|
2019-20 |
34,850 |
30 124 |
14% |
74,895 |
45 104 |
40% |
|
2020-21 |
43,904 |
32,825 |
25% |
66 207 |
58 208 |
11% |
|
2021-22 |
44,993 |
34,375 |
25% |
77 141 |
53,217 |
30% |
|
2022-23 |
50,692 |
29,214^ |
42% |
85,323 |
27,632 |
67% |
|
2023-24 |
68,082 |
44,346 |
33% |
58,808 |
58,269 |
— |
(Source: Standing Committee on Defence, report no. 36)
^ Figures up to December 2022
