A dissent note on Dr. Kota Harinarayana’s interview of 1.12.2023

 

Here’s Dr Kota Harinarayana’s take on #Tejas orders going up  M Anantha Krishnan

 (As told to #AKM on 1.12.'23) #avgeeks #aviation #defence #military

@IAF_MCC

 

Dr. Kota Harinarayan (KH) needs no introduction in India. He was the guiding light of the Tejas project upto the TD a/c which led to the Tejas Mk 1. He was brought in around 1985 as the Chief Designer & Programme Director replacing Raj Mahindra (ex-HAL HJT 16) the first Chief Designer elect who was eased out of the post by possibly planted questions raised in Parliament- rather in the manner of Mohua Moitra’s recent questions about Adani. KH is a 1960 (?) graduate of BHU and was a Ph. D student of Prof. R. Narasimha who along with VS Arunachalam & Prof. Raja Ramanna were the main force behind the setting up of ADA to develop the LCA. Unlike V. Krishnamurthy who set up Maruti none of the above Three seniors had any Industrial Experience & KH had three yrs as GET level and three years as Chief designer Level the interim reportedly spent at DRDO HQ at New Delhi.. In between reportedly  KH picked up a M.Tech, a Ph.D and a degree in law.  The rest is too well known to need repetition. KH recently appeared in  an interview on the occasion of the Tejas orders being doubled.

I was struck by a few things about the interview.

i)      The tone of self- congratulation when the project is still not yet out of the woods.

ii)     The complete absence of any contrition or apology in a public servant in spite of the fact that the project which is my estimate has failed, and  dangerously so- in terms of time, cost. As of the moment, producibility and serviceability are yet to be proved satisfactorily.

My views are personal and emanate from my interest & studies in aircraft and as a development engineer of experience. The only point I agree with KH is that the order is a game changer though in not the same way.

His answers are in bold font. My takes are in italics.    

 

1      From facing extensive criticism from the various quarters in the past while developing the aircraft to getting all round appreciation now is a matter of great pride.

The Tejas getting all round appreciation is KH’s opinion. The figures available in various GOI sources as well as the results of the A/c in various export bids do not support the statement. Tejas Mk1 had circa 2013 had 83 concessions, today the "improved" Mk1A has about 43 “concessions” and still needs considerable redesign particularly in weight savings and designing for production to achieve its potential-which the Dassault consultants had embedded in the airframe-along -and this is a personal view- with the usual "traps" a consultant may sometime leave in a proposal.

 

2.     There has been a persistent campaign against the aircraft from time to time and I feel these are people with a motive or people with ignorance.

There was no "persistent" campaign in the first two decades & even well into the first decade of this century. (Yes. This benighted project is THAT old); not a murmur when the Tejas missed its declared first flight date of April 1990. The people understood. There was never a murmur when it missed its service entry date of 1995 There was no murmur when after the “roll out”in 1995 the a/c was rolled back in to the hangar and had to be reworked over a period of 18 months. Again, the people understood enough to give the benefit of the doubt. There were no murmurs when Tejas failed to meet commitments too numerous to count-even when these commitments were promised to the highest authority. No one then accused ADA of bare faced bluff. If criticisms started 20- 30 year after the founding of ADA-and that too about the delays- to ascribe them to “motives” & “ignorance” then  I feel KH is riding a high horse indeed! The statement indicates a wanting of a sense of accountability to the people matched by a great level of smug self-congratulation!.KH fails to see the irony of the situation. A fourth generation a/c being discussed  as a debutante in the third decade of the present century. Motives, Sir!? Ignorance? On the part of whom?

 

3.     There are several challenges we faced on a daily basis whilst jumping from a 1^st generation tech to a 4^th generation Tech.

To keep records straight the Indian Industry did NOT jump from a 1^st generation a/c such as the Vampire to 4+ generation a/c. One expects KH to know the difference between a 1st generation ,a 3^rd generation and 4 th generation fighter. To call the HF 24 Marut -the best of 3^rd Generation designs- a 1^st generation aircraft is either an attempt to justify the delay, deplorable lack of domain knowledge, or the usual casualness with facts that we have come to expect from this programme.

 

4.     I am extremely happy today that the IAF is the biggest supporter and has taken it as it as their frontline fighter.

4.1 Assuming this is indeed true- The GOI order notwithstanding-This happiness could have been achieved much earlier. One recalls that in the formative years1993 the IAF- which had provided accurate & well researched inputs ( Krishnamurthy & Singh 200 page dissent.1993) on the shortcomings of the proposed design. Instead of being co-opted into the project as an, ally, which is the universal practise, the IAF was shown the door because it was presumed to be "interfering" with ADA's plan . The IAF were brought in perhaps in the 2010s, over twenty plus years of the start of the project- when the aircraft needed total redesign of details-something we could have avoided had the IAF been listened to in 1993..  If I recall aright some 9000 “mods” were involved. The figure normally would be less than one twentieth of that. By my assessment the IAF is not a happy customer.

4.2 I am surprised  that KH thinks Sulur AFB deep in Tamil Nadu is a frontline. Air Base. If that be the level of delusion in the mind set it reflects on the value of his other statements of the interview. For the record there WAS some sort of deployment a few months ago but that must have been a “no go” as we have not heard a cheep about it from a ( well organized?) Tejas Support fanboys network that goes into a frenzy if a new stencil is applied to the tie down blocks.

4.3  This claim of a front- line fighter is further reduced in that the A/c has been de facto self- certified by the developing organization with a FOC whilst its 23 mm GSh gun firing has not yet been cleared. How can a Govt. Organization charged with certificating a product do this?   It is a reflection on all the comments of the quality & veracity- not just of the state of readiness of the aircraft but the integrity and professionalism of our present development structure. No doubt the paper work for such “concessions” is in top order with an AF a "toothless" customer" accepting" non installation of a gun - that too on a MiG 21 replacement, mind you-because there is no independent overseeing body. Is it any wonder that the IAF may seem to prefer imports- they get what they get the feature they want , not a paper "concession" wrested from them by an appeal to "Mummy" .This organization structural weakness-absolutely no "external" agency doing an audit is a primary cause of this mess. Very simple- no feed back loop worth the mention. that may an important factor in the present delay and chaos. An ACM had pertinently asked "how many concessions will we get from the enemy" but he must have been labelled "Import Lobby" instead of mountains bein moved to answer his very valid question.

 

5.     Tejas is superior in quality and capabilities when compared to fighter in its class.

Designers falling in love with their designs is a common disease that prevent improvements. They sulk and fight instead of correct. The Tejas needs extensive correction and not Mother Love. Figures available in the public domain and the performance of the Tejas in the export market does not support the statement. At home, Tejas Analysts noted that the Tejas squadron was 5 years in IAF service at the time and remained at Sulur when the Balakot strike/AD sorties were carried out by legacy Mirage 2000s & MiG 21 bis and not by the Tejas supposedly superior to the M2K.

 

 

Tejas has the capacity and range to undertake critical missions today.

 

Not for the present. To recall Nizam-ud -din Auwlia’s “Hanuz Diilli dur Ast” (Delhi is yet far away!). Pl. see above if the Tejas was not used for Balakot or tackling the F 16s a la Abhinandan it indicates that despite boasts of range .capability etc the AF has its reservations. My view is with the present weight even the Mk1A  will be just about good enough as a mediocre CAS but is no frontline air defence fighter.Its weight should eb furthe rbrought down to <6000 kgs.

 

6.     I believe more orders will come in the future and we will be able to export it as well.

Not in its present form or state. No chance. Much potential performance & serviceability issues remains to be wrung out and extracted from the airframe. I expect production problems now that orders are there. An independent professional revision of the design is needed to optimize the design. That would be a worthwhile effort indeed given that we have been driven in to the marshes. The Tejas with the weight improved to below 6000 kgs would be a considerable aircraft but that is a low cost project and the Tejas Mk2 is a nice way to sweep all the mess created so far under the carpet whilst the nation is made to wait for the new wonderbus which will eb rolle out in 2035.

 

7.     I am told that plans are afoot in HAL to increase the production rate and supply chain.

This is news indeed. We have already set up production rate of 24 a/c p.a. If it is only 8 p.a.it would be a figure that indicate there is much dust under the producibility carpet.  

 

8.     Amidst all this we will have the LCA MK2 and the AMCA rolling out.

The present set up was the proposer, executer , assessor and certifier were all branches of the one and same lobby. Without a purge and restructure of the development process it will be extremely ill advised if these projects e sanctioned. If required let us find face saving excuses for not going ahead. We cannot repeat the past and expect different results without making changes to the system. The Mk2 configuration of the canards is too trouble prone to bear thinking about and is risky. The indications are that the ground work needed to design the AMCA have not been done. I doubt if the AMCA and LCA mk2 roll out. The AMCA project teams worked with lethargy and boobed on the Project studies until it was pointed out. Face saving excuses s for not sanctioning the projects will have to be found e.g. the US not supplying the engines.

 

9.     In the next 10-20years IAF will be flying more home- grown fighters which in turn will be rewriting the Military aviation ecosystem in the country.

Here to the pious hope. IT CAN happen but if wishes were horses beggars would ride.

   

My dream is to make IAF fighter base 100% indigenous.

 Caution is advised.  KH’s earlier efforts to dream resulted in a reduction in the IAF squadron strength by 10 squadrons and even at the moment of writing there is no plannable assurance that we have seen the last of this decay. It is doubtful if the CMD of HAL would be able to guarantee delivery in March 2024 the remaining portion of the 2003 orders. Perhaps the time has come to stop dreaming? Acceptance that things are far from satisfactory, rather than self- congratulation, is the first step to correction which will be voluminous but not difficult..

My take:. It is naïvete to assume that the “Import Lobby” sits only at Raisina Hill or at the various Forces HQs and DPSUs/DRDO labs are completely free of such stigma.    The “Import Lobby” operates like an all arms battle group. 

The Lobby has to have elements in the Bureaucracy, the Forces and DRDO and ALL are beneficiaries. There is no single sinner. The pattern usually is a requirement raised by the Services, the DRDO immediately insists that it can be developed internally and the Bureaucracy releases the fundings. Having obtained the funds the DRDO makes some progress but delays occur until the project demand becomes critical when-with a compliant Government in Rasina- imports are made under force majeure. This way all three components are happy. DRDO gets the funds, the Forces get their toys and the elements in Bureaucracy are jollied. Importantly DRDO retains its “bragging rights/Victim card- “We were just ( mind you-said with a straight face after minimum 20-30 yrs of project start!) on the verge of having the breakthrough etc etc”. This "Victim Card of being Thwarted at the last moment" is so necessary to get the funding for the next project. I sometimes wickedly think that perhaps the expectations was that circa 2000 we would get fed up and import -may be the F 16. All get the kickbacks in cash and kind. There is also the possibility the sub systems for the programme may be leaked to parties abroad. A “benign Neglect” style of the ”ruling Government” as in the past is a great help. The system works flawlessly as all the elements involved benefit and no one is “beggared” at the expense of the other. This is the pattern particularly for Weapons Platforms. Occasional “accidents” & “sabotage” e.g. Gnat Trainer crash, Arjun gearbox, (digressing- if someone put sand in to the gearbox to sabotage it as claimed it is then also true that this could not have happened without “carelessness” on the part of the DRDO team. What was CVRDE’s security team doing? The prototypes are always supposed to be guarded like the King’s Jewels!) ATAG barrel bursts, HF 24 Mk1B & IR , Gnat Trainer crashes etc can be organized to move things along. The ensuing accusations and counter accusations along with various issues raised e.g. Order size, funds, technology development problems of new technology raise enough dust to cover all traces.  

 

Going by the present Government’s methodical homework and willingness to take wise risks the order for the Tejas Mk1A indicates a break with past practice.  The Govt. is forcing the issue. The DRDO owned/led development system has certified that the Tejas is ready and raring to go. Government realizes that a direct Hot war with China and or Pakistan is unlikely. Though no substitute, the order for the Prachand attack helicopters which appears to be a more reliable bet, a well- designed product and will be useful as a emergency capability. The Government is taking a calculated risk. Like the USSR in the 1920s- when the Narkom banned all foreign aircraft & equipment- the present decision to order the Mk1A does two things:

The first is that it breaks the “win -win” chain in the import Lobby. If the Services element of the lobby co-operates it will be beggared because it will not get the equipment it may wish to import other benefits notwithstanding.

The second is that the Government has taken a calculated risk and called the Tejas programme’s bluff. The Government says that it has addressed all the complaints of the DRDO and now says You have the orders. You have yourself (DRDO/ADA) said this Tejas is wonderful, you have yourself certificated it to FOC. Now please produce or forever remain silent when the Government introduces much needed reforms. The future is interesting. As a first step to redemption PSU/ DRDO must deliver those 6 trainers to the IAF by 31 March 2024.yr. Those a/cs were ordered 22 yrs ago. HAL, I expect, will fail in number and quality because the project was not managed by engineers so past carelessness e.g. the “Cottage Industry” choice of many of the vendors. When the ear of HAL will be pulled as they say the head of ADA will come. The reforms will have to be accepted.

The above is a scenario s I see and estimate. Let me wait to see if the remaining 6 aircraft of the 2003 (!) order is delivered to the IAF  on or by 31 March 24 before I revise my predictions.