Post Op Sindoor: Review of Defence Production & Procurement Systems For India’s High Tech Wars: MVI Debate

EDITOR'S NOTE

Since Op Sindoor hasn't yet officially ended it has been leading to some unending debates on various subjects linked to modern high tech wars that are currently being fought across the world which has led to debates being triggered on various contingencies that India could be confronted with due to influential foreign powers that seem hell bent on checking India's overrall economic growth story ,development and prosperity.

Trigger for Debate :

News IADN Reports dt 25 Sep 2025 stated:

"# IAF was insistent to sign the 97 #Tejas contract only after the earlier 83 starts coming in, but # MoD wanted to spend its budget within specified timelines "

The above statement was responded to by Col Shivaji Ranjan Ghosh with this u/m response that triggered this MVI Debate.

"Is this how we are demonstrating atmanirbharta in defence production?

No other country is interested in the Tejas, so we force it down the throats of the IAF !"

When the above response was posted on the MVI Core WA group it triggered a debate basically amongst Army and Airforce veterans on the subject of procurements ,indigenisation ,self reliance and atmanirbharta for meeting the present and future operational needs of the Airforce and Army . All these responses collectively convey a lot and will surely enhance readers awareness on many issues , especially those linked with meeting the operational needs of fighter aircrafts for the Airforce , linked technicalities of procurements from foreign vendors / countries and lessons learnt from Op Sindoor and future challenges confronting India in this present high tech 21st century warfare .

Editor,MVI

RESPONSES

GP CAPT TP SRIVASTAVA:

The first lot of TEJAS was literally forced down the throat, with IAF being forced to agree to grant 28 concessions to HAL.

HAL, DRDO, ORDNANCE FACTORIES are the most useless entities of the nation. Only BRAHMOS is worth talking about.

On the other hand, look at ISRO.

COL VIJAY BHATE:

So true, what Col Shivaji Ranjan Ghosh says

HAL is being rewarded for its lethargic, unprofessional attitude at the cost of suffering of Airforce or the failure of Govt to ensure that promised delivery of engines takes place ?

Whatever the reason, defence preparedness will suffer!

And CDS , MOD are unable to convince the govt that delay is very detrimental to the security of the nation?

It's such a sad situation .

BRIG SANJAY SANGWAN :

R&D or development of any technology is linked to a felt need in the environment, immediate or in the near future. COVID vaccine is a recent example. The two Great Wars gave a tremendous incentive to the need for better equipment for all three services and led to liberal resource allocation for R&D and production capacities. All this gave a strong base of technology, R&D, and skilled people for further development of the arms industry. Even after the end of the 2nd WW, numerous wars have been going on to continue the impetus to the arms industry. Need for a faster, better jet aircraft was felt in the Korean and the Vietnam war and designing work on the F series of aircraft had begun in late 60s and the first flight took place around 1971, 4-5 years later and it was improved upon gradually thereafter. Eurofighter design began in 1983, and the first ac rolled off the assembly line in 2003, 20 years later.

It is easy to take an ideal position and point out shortcomings. What was the technology level of India during most of the initial decades after independence? India didn't even make a scooter engine until just a few years back. I wonder how many of us have been associated with designing or manufacturing of military equipment, especially the advanced kind. India had opted for a socialist economy with defence R&D and production left to the PSUs, and the work culture of these was well known to all of us. By virtue of being a tankman and undertaking technical studies regarding tank design, I have seen the disinterest, lethargy, and complacency in both R&D and PSU units. The culture promoted in the country was for import of equipment and not designing and development at home. The PSUs were more of unions for vote bank and for using the defence budgets. A tank's development cycle is an average of 20 years even in advanced countries, and an aircraft is far more intricate and advanced technologies synergised together. In all these exercises, resources and technology constraints are major factors affecting the design and development. The need for indigenous equipment has been felt all along, and resources are being allocated now, but still, an impetus is required, which can come only through a demand and an order on the design and production agencies. As the aircraft are produced and get employed in service, shortcomings that emerge will get rectified and improved upon. It is better to have indigenous equipment even if it is slightly weak than waiting for a superior one, resulting in a long wait. The way global powers are trying to target India's rise and growth, we need the aircrafts ASAP. Even if we opt to buy off the shelf, firstly, it will only add to technical complexities of the IAF, and even the foreign supplier will take time to produce and deliver. We might as well develop our own. Our space program got a boost because of the demand placed on ISRO. With a strong fleet of Su 30s, Rafael, and soon Su 57s, Tejas will provide the necessary numbers to meet the calculated need for 42 Sqns. It is a sensible option considering the attendant issues unless Tejas proved grossly inadequate in combat. Op Sindoor has proved that India can meet advanced technology needs also indigenously.

COL VIJAY BHATE:

Just a point. Since we claim to be in the top 5/6 countries in world, I am sure no country in these top 5/6 are using a single engine fighter with this limited range and weight carrying capacity ?

Let us not shackle our Airforce with such options, please.

GP CAPT JOHNSON CHACKO:

I can not confirm the veracity of the post.

We have to accept what the political masters decide. MoD is euphemism for the powers that be as MoD is a part of GoI.

There must be superior knowledge and other factors unknown to the IAF professionals that decides these.

In my opinion, they are not SOTA fighters.

However, they can be used effectively in a NCW environment.

IMHO, a fighter ac uses its radar to lock on to the target ac. The target ac normally has a RWR (Radar Warning Receiver) , which picks up this threat and uses ECM or manoeuvres to protect itself. With a long range BVR, it has adequate time to do this. Once the fighter ac tracks the target, the missile is turned ON, and the radar of the missile achieves a lock on. After that the missile is fired. The coordinates of the target are still fed to the missile until it reaches the terminal phase of interception. Close to the target a proximity fuse is activated and the warhead explodes, impacting the target. This is putting it in a very simple terms.

BVR combat needs AWACS and AAR ac. These are HVAA (High Value Aerial Assets - each costing more that $250M) and hence positioned outside the range of BVR missiles or SAGW range. AWACS has the coordinates of the target ac and own ac. It directs own ac to a position of advantage for it to fire the BVR missile within the missile range. BVR missiles need mid course guidance. If the AWACS can give guidance to the missile after it is fired from own ac then the missile can home on to the target without the target getting any warning of own ac radar or missile guidance radar coming on. So technicall, we need a fighter to act as a launcher from a distance without even putting on it's radar. Tejas can definitely do that job. The NETWORK made of AWACS, the launcher ac and the missile can do the job. LCA is $40M, Rafale is closer to $100M. We can do with a decent mix, provided we can NETWORK them. For tha, we need the Source Codes as we need them to communicate over a datalink. That is network centricity. We should be able to integrate our AWACS with LCA and our own Astra BVR missiles so that we have a secure datalink. This will definitely enhance Atmanirbharta. No other country will part with the source code of their ac be it Rafale, Su 57, F 35 etc.

Since we have the money and the intent, we may be successful in arm twisting them to force release of source code. Imports can fill the gap until the deliveries of Tejas materialise.

In Op Sindoor, we shot down their HVAA believed to be an AWACS at 314 Kms. The range of the AWACS radar is generally 300 Kms. With that ac downed, all the fighters that it controlled had to land back as they were blinded in a sense. S 400 did a good job. They pushed AWACS beyond effective range from where they could not see our ac. We need more S 400s/500s.

In a two front war, considering that an AWACS can cover 600 km of the border, we will roughly need 30 AWACS and a similar number of AAR ac for 24 hr alert status to be maintained. A BVR combat may last over 1.5 hrs. Fighters will run out of fuel, so AAR becomes essential.

Abbreviations used :

SOTA - State Of The Art .

NCW - Network Centric Warfare.

IMHO - In My Humble Opinion.

COL RAJINDER KUSHWAHA:

While I agree with Group Captain Johnson Chacko, I would regretfully say that most of us here advocate to fight the 21st century war with 19th/ 20th century doctrines. This is always the case with most veterans who usually remain sunk in “my times”.

We do not want to learn from Operations “Rising Lion” and “ Lucky Drop” of Israel . No , we don’t even want to learn from our own Operation “Sindoor” and use of “Akash Teer “ A2 / AD system .

Why are we silent on how many RAFALES were lost ? We can keep making up stories? The fact is that we had lost 4-5 fighter ac on the first two days . Thereafter, it was the end of “Classic Air War” from both sides .

Knocking down of Pak’s AWACS at a distance of 315 KMs should tell us as to what would be the fate of all these “classic Air operations” whether, Fifth Generation a/c or sixth generation . In a future war, air crafts would have to operate from STAND OFF distances with LRCM and proper terminal guidance . As I have always been saying, for over 5-6 years, IAF has to re- orient itself for “ STAND OFF WARS”. There would be no “ Dog fights” or “ strategic Bombing” , “ interdiction” by air crafts, but missiles, Laser Killers, EMP guns and drones (Swarm or MIRV) would have to undertake these roles . Also, there would be NO “territory - grabbing” tasks but total annihilation of the enemy before - “ BOOTS ON GROUND”. Ground Forces would have to think of their own air cover by way of A2 / AD systems .

Why waste funds on these expensive elephants, such as Rafales, F-35 or even SU-57, if the same job can be done by homemade weapon system / weapon launch pads .

Leave the job to present leaders and stop being unduly critical of DRDO or HAL. TEJAS project is hanging fire because of suitable engine . ARAMNIRBHARTA started only a few years back . It takes time. Other nations do not give the “ resource code” to fit your own missiles / weapons systems of their ac—. Rafale deal was stuck because of this .

NIXON FERNANDO:

You won't believe this, but the man behind ISRO's success is TN Seshan, teamed up under the likes of Vikram Sarabhai and Satish Dhavan.

ISRO was culled free off the Atomic Energy Commission and became independent in the early 70's. Earlier, it was a private organization, and its employees became government employees in the early 70's. TNS had the role of drafting admin rules that would govern its functioning.I think he ensured proper admin supervision of expenses without unduly interfering with a scientist's freedom. That is the cause of its success in all probability. Knowing Mr Seshan I am 99%sure.

DRDO and HAL will rise to the challenge only if the admin function is made to imitate ISRO's.

Editor's Note:

This is a rare input from Nixon Fernando who was very closely associated with Mr TN Seshan, ex Cabinet Secy , CEC ,etc...

He assisted him a lot in the personal recordings of his illustrious career ,including his own authored books and autobiography.

CDR RAVINDRA PATHAK:

So much is being discussed about the Tejas. We must consider the time lost during the Congress regime, neglecting the defence sector. The support has just been given. Just compare the first TV station (limited to Delhi) was a black and white transmission.Induction has been made, and over years IMHO the Tejas will also follow the same path as the TV.

COL SHIVAJI RANJAN GHOSH:

I hope the Tejas follows the path of the TV as mentioned by Cdr Pathak. On the other hand, I hope that it will not follow the path of the Arjun tank and the 5.56 INSAS.

Brig Sangwan says "It is better to have indigenous equipment even if it is slightly weak than waiting for a superior one, resulting in a long wait." This is mirroring what Gen Bipin Rawat had said regarding accepting weapons and equipment that meet 75% of the GSQR. Well, I for one would not like to give my soldier a rifle and tell him that it has a 75% chance of firing. We have allowed ourselves to succumb to such pressures where we feel that "something is better than nothing", because we rightly feel that "our men will not let us down". The least that we could do to reciprocate is to assure them that "your leadership will not let you down"

As one current Chief had famously stated (before he too succumbed to the pressure) that "Atmanirbharta can’t be achieved at the cost of national security"

GP CAPT TP SRIVASTAVA:

I am glad you mentioned the professionally obnoxious statement of former CDS. TEJAS, too, was forced on IAF with 28 designated faults or deficiencies by HAL. As of today in September 2025, HAL is not capable of delivering original 83 plus new 97 aircraft orders before 2040. This is notwithstanding timeliness claims made by HAL. AMCA and TEDBF are not even on the horizon. They are mere plywood models for display. Equally important issue is non availability of indigenous PGMs in large numbers. Emergency option is foreign vendor for at least six squadrons, 108 aircraft.

BRIG SANJAY SANGWAN:

Incorrect interpretation of slightly weak equipment. Arjun's firing accuracy and lethality are better than the T series. Its problem has been weak automotive performance in an extended run, which implies that it may need some repair early for which the organisation of a CG and CC cater for. Its problem was weight and size which led to transportation problems by road and rail and hence was deployed in the desert sector. A rifle with only 75% reliability of firing isn't in the acceptance range at all. Its range or accuracy may be less by a small percentage over an extended period of usage, or it may need servicing early is what is implied by slightly weak. In the case of Tejas, it may be ceiling, range, armament capacity, and EW capabilities, and it doesn't mean that the ac won't fly 25% of the time. Please study the development cycle of any weapon system or any technology. None are born perfect, and they all are improved upon during the life cycle. Imports of equipment will never let the country be self-reliant to overcome the associated vulnerability.

GP CAPT JOHNSON CHACKO:

I wonder why the GoI does not want to disclose the actual losses in Op Sindoor, other than what CDS publicly stated. May be a lesson learnt from Galwan where Chinese did not disclose and the world thinks that they did not lose any soldiers. may be a part of IW.

There was no classic air war at all in Op Sindoor. Destruction of terrorists hubs without SEAD and DEAD was itself a deviation. There was no element of surprise. It is against even Army doctrine of assault before softening of defences. That may have caused our losses of ac(aircraft).

Air war has already gone into the stand off mode with AWACS, AEW&C and BVRs. In Op Sindoor, no ac crossed the border. The wreckage of what we lost will be in our territory. Since all pilots are safely back, they would have ejected. We don't find any SM clips of villagers helping them till the chopper rescues them after para landing. Is the Govt control on SM so strong that not even one clip could be shared? Ours is a country where we cannot do anything without a thousand people coming to know of it.

There is no need for strategic bombing as ALCMs can hit targets at all levels simultaneously, be it tactical, operational or strategic. There will always be a need for new generation weapon systems while the majority would still be current or old generation, irrespective of the domain that it is used in. When we shift to network centricity then the cost of the platforms can be reduced as the effectiveness of the network becomes the core. Soviets had network centricity since the 50s.

The source codes are the intellectual property of the equipment manufacturers. They will never give it for loss of future orders. Voice has limitations. AWACS can talk to the pilots and give directions for interception etc. What the network does is that AWACS can communicate with the ac and the BVR missile electronically using a datalink. To do that we need the source code of all the three. Then the radar picture can be transmitted by the AWACS to the fighter without the fighter putting ON its radar. Instructions can be sent from the AWACS to the missile with the fighter out of the loop so that the missile can be guided to the target. If we want to use an Astra on a Rafael, we need the source code (language) of the Rafale. Normally, they tell us to provide the source code of the software of the missile, integrate it and give it to us. Why would we reveal it to them? Integrating the Astra with the LCA is not an issue as we produce both of them. Now buy Su 57 or the F 35 and increase the complexity. We will have to suffer that as we cannot produce enough LCAs in time.

LCA was accepted with 28 concessions. We may need to redesign the LCA to fulfil some of these concessions, I heard. It is not what the ASQR wanted. We have proven many critical technologies at the first attempt by a team of engineers including the Chairman ADA, whose pay was less than $1000 per month as stated by Air Mshl Philip Rajkumar to the American team that came to negotiate the engine deal for LCA. LCA is a stepping stone for self reliance. In Op Sindoor, PAF launched 70 ac and IAF 80 for a BVR battle spread along the Western border. In a two front engagement, we will need much more. We need the numbers as of yesterday. AMCA has been delayed, so we need to fill the gap with imports, like the Air Chief said "Atmanirbharta cannot be achieved at the cost of National Security".

HAL is only the production agency. The design and development was done by many agencies, all pulling at each other for R&D funds. As a production agency, if I am given confirmed orders for about a 100 ac amounting to Rs 60,000 Crs with a captive customer, I cannot say that I will produce only 12 ac a year, especially when a production line of 8 ac per year costs only Rs 3500 Crs and I have a Market Capitalisation of 2,30,000 Crs. I will sell equity worth Rs 7000 Crs and set up a production facility for 16 additional ac per year. If not, activate other business entities to invest that amount and deliver the ac. After all, the machines can be used for manufacturing buses later on, which HAL did at one point of time with the spare capacity that they had. I wonder how HAL has ramped up it's production.

We delivered in Space, Atomic Energy and Missiles by removing the Babudom and giving access to the PMO when needed. Similarly, we need to have an Aeronautics Commission to fill the gap between intent and capability.

MAJ GEN RAJ MEHTA:

Arjun started as Chetak. This was around 1970. It was to weigh 40 tons. The users, however, kept changing QRs, and costs kept going up with DRDO and HVF not capable of making their own tank but not accepting a lack of capability.

Cut to the finished Arjun. Its weight had gone up 66 tons. It needed ODC sanction for rail move due weight, height and width excess.

Its gun is imported. Its engine ditto. So also it's gear box and drive train. IItssights are imported , and o is its stabilizer system.

The gun is good. The automotive drive,dimensions, and ground pressure are not. Its bridge classification is Class 60. Most Indian bridges were then Class 50. It's too heavy for the air movement.

It is a liability as it has VKL issues. It also does not have a supporting ZIP set support.

The tank is an early atmanirbhar product...a screw driver approach.

It has many lessons for us. We now have Zorawar on the blocks. Hope it fares better.

COL RAJINDER KUSHWAHA:

Absolutely right ! Whose fault was it ? DRDO or Users ,who kept changing QRs? The problem of those who criticise Aatamnirbharta or DRDO & HAL is that they have been denied free jaunts to foreign lands at the exchequer expenses and may be some hidden commission, too.

If delays were caused, it was because our thinking was never futuristic but of “current times”, which led to change of GSQR every time one read a new article in a foreign magazine .

The problem of Indian military thinkers is of acquiring a weapon system and then try to evolve a strategy around it. We fit ourselves into a system rather than working out our own outfits. We should plan our weapon systems and equipment, suiting our immediate and future needs and then work out our GSQR. But as copycats, we picked up stuff from foreign magazines and decided about acquiring them .

India should work out its own military requirements based on our own threat perceptions and realistic appreciation then justify needs for our future wars and not what the USA, Russia or France were offering to us .

Let us consider for a while as to when we would fight a next war with Pakistan and China— tomorrow of 2 years hence — or even 5 years or 10 years hence — what would be the profile of enemy weapon system then ? And how best we can counter it with indigenously made systems ? Can we do without Rafales or F-35 or even Su-57 ? Would we be able to develop our own Tejas - mark -3 or 4 or even AMCA ? Where there is a will, there is a way . India does not need Copy cat solutions from experts of “ foreign magazines” knowledge. And indigenous development, even after reverse engineering, needs time . We have wasted atlest 65-70 years in buying things off international shelfs — need to have some patience.

MAJ GEN RAJ MEHTA

Not in full agreement.

DRDO and OFB were equally culpable, if not more than the user was.

There were many foreign jaunts for these named entities minus users.

More importantly, why did DRDO accept a job where they had no capability? Ditto OFB?

DRDO had SA to RM as their voice. What did we have as our voice? We know that answer.

Zorawar will have a Belgian gun, a US Cummins engine after Germany refused.

So what's changed?

The system sucks.The Tejas state is worse. Blaming a person is fine but is inappropriate. Our system across uniforms lacks checks and balances with IN least affected. Within the Services, we are somnolent but shift blame.

Sad.