it's not just about the main system.
most of story happens at the sub-system level. for this discussion's sake let's say there are 1000 major sub-systems. each sub-system will have elements of lessons learnt from past or parallel projects, these sub-systems would have gone thru it's design iterations, proven and certified along the way. out of these 1000, in these three decades may be 800 are good to go, and 200 are new and yet to be proven. when we say, some main system is certified, we are saying these 1000 sub-systems individually and together are being certified as a system. even this explanation is over-simplification of what might actually be happening.
At the end of the day all this has to result in something tangible & usable not another TD with a new name which is essentially more of the same.
in missiles too, for decades "concerned citizens" were giving a lot of "advice" to DRDO. not so much these days because DRDO has reached a stage where majority of sub-systems are proven tech, now reached a stage that they can cook up new configurations in short span of time.
Yes & the missile program under the flagship - IGMDP produced results which resulted in a whole host of projects which too yielded results .
Ditto for radars & many other such sub systems viz the LCH is to be armed with an EW suite which by the looks of it is going to be sourced locally as opposed to the ones in the Rudra which is from a SAAB South Africa JV.
At the end of the day all these developments be it of sub components or sub assemblies has to result in something concrete . What exactly has the ADE have to show for the Rustom project ? You'd have to name their specific achievements if you're arguing in favour of either ADE or the Rustom project.
it will depend on timeline they set for themselves. if we know for a fact that they set themselves a target of two more years, then maybe we can have some outsider's perspective on it. is there any public information on timeline they set for themselves?
as of now, even the first flight hasn't happened. even if everything goes well, it will take 7-8 years before production starts.
This is precisely the nub of the entire issue. They've already taken anywhere between 40 to 24+ years depending on your PoV & they've yet to deliver something concrete.
Just when we think ADE isn't capable of any more bad news comes news that the Archer is due for test flights followed by information that the engines powering them are of Chinese make .
I'd rather they would have begun trials with the indigenous engine since at the end of the day both need to be certified. Further this also raises the question what if the indigenous engine fails or falls short of performance expectations ?
We can't go back to the Chinese engine can we for there's no way these would find their way into production variants which brings me to back my original point - what's the point of testing it with a Chinese engine ?
And if you're adding 7-8 more years for production from date , please be informed that the entire project for some lousy MALE would've taken 31-32 years going by the low chronology here & it's still a big if .
This is precisely the problem with ADE. They started showing some success with the Nirbhay / ITCM program once Dr Tessy Thomas took over as DG - Aero DRDO incharge of a cluster of 6 labs including our favourite ADE apart from ADA , DARE , GTRE , CABS & CEMILAC & given the secrecy behind the entire project I won't be surprised in the least if development work would've been off loaded to sister labs other than what's required or once again personnel from other labs were deputed to ADE to bring the project to fruition just like the Ghatak project was alloted to ADE from ADA by transferring the entire project along with the entire team from ADA to ADE lock stock n barrel by the then DG DRDO Dr Christopher just to cover up for the failures of this particular lab .
foreignpolicy.com
