By Kamal Shah & Aritra Banerjee
A round table conversation between senior executives of Lockheed Martin and the editorial director and senior correspondent of Indian Aerospace & Defence provided for incisive observations into the suitability of the F-21 multirole fighter being the next major addition to the Indian Air Force. Lockheed Martin has sweetened the deal by offering a ‘Made in India’ provision for the aircraft and makes a strong case for its acquisition.
Present in the discussion were Brett Medlin (Campaign Lead, Aeronautics and Business Development), Michael N. Kelley, VP-India, Aeronautics Strategy and Business Development; Michael Biorn, Director, Sustainment Campaigns Americas, MEA and Indo Pacific. Kamal Shah and Aritra Banerjee, representing IA&D posed the questions, and it was, by any yardstick, an illuminating exchange of views.
Q. How is the F-21 significantly different from the F-16V, and what prompted its making?
Brett Medlin: In terms of how the F-21 is significantly different from the F-16V, it is a truly unique solution specifically designed for India as we understand India’s requirements today. The IAF has not come out with an RFP or formal solicitation for their specific Air Staff Qualitative Requirements to-date, but we remain committed to being compliant with those. We are offering the F-21 based on the number of discussions that we have had to date. I believe we now have a good baseline in terms of the configuration.
Our portfolio is a spiral development and shows how Lockheed Martin leverages technology across platforms. The F-21, with its particularly advanced cockpit, enhances the pilot’s situational awareness. The pilot-vehicle interface from the F-35 and the F-22 have been infused into the F-21.
A dorsal fairing will be added to the single-seat configuration for future systems upgrades, integration, and potentially indigenous initiatives based on the IAF’s requirements. We are also incorporating triple missile launcher adapters, which is essentially an AME on the wing. It accommodates 40% more air-to-air weapons payload. Those are a few examples. I will not specifically speak in terms of the IAF’s unique requirements, but on the software side, there are several upgrades. Again, in order to be compliant and satisfy the IAF’s requirements, as we understand them today, we believe they are quite different from what the F-16V offers.
Q. The F-21 is an unprecedented ‘Make in India’ opportunity combining the strength of Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defence contractor, and Tata, India’s premier industrial house, to deliver a historic win-win for the US and India. Can you put this sentiment into ‘plane’ terms?
Michael N. Kelley, VP-India: We were committed to ‘Make-in-India’ well before the term was coined. I have been in Delhi since 2005 and played an instrumental role in the setup with Tata Advanced Systems for our joint ventures in Hyderabad. We have two very successful joint ventures, Tata Lockheed Martin Aerostructures Limited, where we build the empennage for the C-130J; every C-130J flying globally has a very large structural component that is made in India. We also have a joint venture with Sikorsky that makes helicopter cabins for the world market.
Our relationship with Tata has evolved in relation to the broader Indian industry, making it an integral part of our global supply chain, either through the Tata joint ventures or directly. For the F-21 programme, we have evaluated over 500 Indian companies for potential roles as part of our supplier base. These range from micro up to the biggest Public Sector Units and private sector companies. A wide net has been cast to create an ecosystem of Indian businesses and Indian suppliers that can be introduced into our overall supply chain.
F-21 leverages all of this. The cooperation with Tata has also resulted in a demonstration of fighter wing production in Hyderabad. This called for high-quality standards and fulfilled proof of a concept. We are truly committed to grow Make-in-India by bringing a larger pool of companies into the supply chain network.
Brett Medlin, F-21 Campaign Lead, Aeronautics and Business Development, adds, that the fighter wing qualification, which brought over significant transfer of technology to India through Tata, demonstrated capability buildup even throughout the pandemic. Having to work in the hybrid virtual environment and with supply chain disruption, and still produce a really high-quality final product is a step that both Lockheed Martin and Tata took at their own initiative, with investments ahead of requirements. This demonstrates our view as a corporation of the Indian market through the eye of a partner and this strengthens our long-standing and continued commitment to defence cooperation in India.
Q: If the F-21 became a prime option for India with the current emphasis on Make in India, which are the most effective links of the supply chain that could be passed on to the indigenous manufacturers to add value to the deal?
Michael Biorn: We advocate the inclusion of Performance-Based Logistics (PBL) to make it the most beneficial deal in the long run. The PBL always involves the customer, the integrator and the supplier. The integrator’s role identifies the best of breed in each of these options for the most effective and competitive support required for the F-21 fleet. The attractiveness of the deal is both in the development of that industrial base within India, and the usage of that base by the integrator in any sustenance agreement that the IAF would want to implement.
Q. How can the F-21 complement the rest of the IAF’s fleet, whose heavy fighters are all Sukhoi’s and with more Rafales on the way? As you know, Gripen, after its Brazil deal of 4 plus 36 aircraft at half the price of a Rafale with full technology thrown in, has brought Saab alive as a global contender. Do you see this cut-rate option as a potential competitor in deals with nations like India?
Brett Medlin: Given the current fighter force structure of the IAF versus, as reported, the 42-squadron requirement, there is a large gap. Taking into consideration the capability of the LCA Tejas and Rafale, the max take-off weight and other characteristics of the F-21 make it a perfect fit within the IAF fleet. Being a single-engine fighter means that from a lifecycle cost perspective, it is extremely affordable as compared to twin-engine fighters of similar capability. The aircraft soon to be retiring within the IAF are predominantly single-engine fighters.
These will be followed by the twin engine aircraft. The F-21 is one of the two single-engine fighters in the competition presently. We believe that the F-21 is well-positioned from a total acquisition and single-engine lifecycle cost affordability standpoint, in addition to the reliability of the single-engine F-21. USAF data demonstrates the GE F110 series engine reliability, and we truly believe that the F-21 continues to be an attractive and competitive option for the IAF.
Michael N. Kelley: We have run several competitions against our Swedish friends in the last decade and scored higher in all of them. Many of our customers have published reports available in the public domain related to the cost of acquisition and ownership of Lockheed Martin aircraft; these have recorded lower costs than the Gripen. I was personally involved in the Slovakia F-16 campaign, where the main competitor was Gripen, and Lockheed Martin managed to stay on top of each evaluation criterion.
The Gripen continues to be a competitor in India. Saab has been here for a long time. It has certainly made the attributes of their product well known in the country. However, at the end of the day, for the reasons that Brett addressed in the earlier question, we believe that the F-21 is going to present a far more capable alternative to India and have a greater reach as far as acquisition and the lifecycle costs are concerned because of the performance-based logistics approach. India is certainly going to look at the acquisition cost and cost of operations, but at the end of the day, the IAF needs the best fighter it can get.
Michael Biorn: While my role is linked with Sustainment Campaigns, my background is one of a pilot. I flew fighters for the U.S. Air Force. When you ask a question about the heavy Sukhoi fighters, one of the key elements I would like to highlight about the F-21 involves its capabilities- the active electronically scanned array radar, its electronic warfare (EW) suite, its IR type sensors and pods. When you couple those with the 12,000-hour airframe, and the 52,000-pound max take-off gross weight, especially when you add in the triple missile launcher adapter with a single-engine fighter, the capability gap to larger, heavier fighters is closed dramatically from what it was early in the 4th gen life cycle. It, therefore, fits into the IAF structure because its value is performance-based, with higher capability for lower acquisition and life cycle costs compared to any other fighter in the competition.
Q. If F-21s were inducted into the air force, how would they enhance the IAF’s mission when China and Pakistan have sophisticated air defences designed to see its signature, the aircraft being a non-stealth fourth-generation fighter?
Michael N. Kelley: One needs an aircraft capable of carrying out a superior mission in terms of performance in a unique environment in the most affordable way, allowing them to be purchased in higher numbers to bring the IAF squadron force up to 42 squadrons. I believe the F-21 is going to have a distinct advantage because the airplane is made here in India, it is going to be supported in India, it is an affordable platform, and it is extremely capable within the group of 4th generation aircraft.
Michael Biorn: As a manufacturer of the F-35, F-22, F-16, and F-21, we talk a lot about our product lines being able to learn from one another. Since your question is specific to 4th generation, within the 4th generation community, a smaller aircraft is better from a signature standpoint. In addition, we can learn from our stealth platforms to help improve our capability in that arena.
Michael N. Kelley: That is another area where a single-engine helps.
Q. As you are no doubt aware, Pakistan is receiving the Chinese-made J-10C and may soon receive a more advanced model in the next few years. Does the F-21 guarantee India’s air superiority? Could you elaborate on the comparative performance envelopes?
Michael N. Kelley: The F-21 offers the latest technology and best capability combined with the Make-in-India features that we have talked about. We provide the best overall package for India. How it shapes up against the J-10, time will tell.
Michael Biorn: In that vein of learning from our platforms, one of the advantages of working with Lockheed Martin is our ability to learn from those other areas. The technology in the F-21 is going to put pilots in a place where their situational awareness of the battlespace is unprecedented. Having flown with some Indian pilots myself, I can reiterate that the training level of pilots is critical to any engagement. Coupling those advanced technologies with training plays a major role in complementing comparisons based on airframe and systems.
Q. HAL is developing a new Tejas variant, a deck-based fighter, and a twin-engine stealth fighter. How is the F-21 going to complement these specifically? What is the edge it offers if you were to explain it to the Indian government?
Michael N. Kelley: Certainly, putting a new F414 engine into the Tejas is going to give it some more power to get up and go. I’m sure it will improve the performance of that aircraft. Brett spoke earlier of how the F-21 would complement the Tejas and the Rafale in the IAF force structure. One would look for something that is going to be available in high numbers to bring that squadron force structure up to 42, replace all the Mig-21s that are being retired from service, and the F-21 fills that gap alongside the Tejas.
You mentioned the deck-based fighter, we would love to see the F/A-18 do well in that competition, but at the end of the day, it really is a separate academic exercise. The IAF and Navy will follow their own processes and select the best aircraft for their needs. The twin-engine stealth fighter, the environment and the relationship between our governments is favourably disposed towards high-tech cooperation.
Michael N. Kelley: I think that the environment for cooperation in defence R&D is indeed better now than it has ever been. AMCA certainly would be one potential avenue for that cooperation if the two governments agree to head down that road. Manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T)- how do you coordinate the operation of manned fighter aircraft with drones – that could be another area for fruitful cooperation. An inter-governmental dialogue would certainly enable us to participate more fully with both HAL and the Indian companies that are working with that sort of thing, but more importantly, with the various DRDO agencies who tend to be the tip of the spear for those kinds of developments. The potential and avenues for transfer of technology have a favourable position presently, and India and the US continue to learn from each other.
Michael N. Kelley: I think what is important is the relationship between Lockheed Martin and the Indian industry writ large. We have a very successful and unprecedented record of accomplishment of cooperation in R&D and production. Lockheed Martin has built F-16s in four different countries around the world and the F-35s in two different countries outside the US. We worked jointly with the Korean industry and Japanese industry to develop highly capable 4th generation fighter and trainer aircraft. We are well positioned to deliver on a commitment for the future.
Brett Medlin: Coming from an industry perspective on a government-to-government matter, a fighter selection is very strategic amongst nations. And there is not a US fighter in India right now, so it would be the next step in the evolution of the relationship, with the signing of the foundational agreements, with the successful execution of the Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI), with opening the apertures of commerce and licences and enabling industry collaboration. We remain very positive and committed to the F-21 offering and the traction between the US and India governments certainly aids in that future cooperation.
Q. India now manufactures BVR missiles and air-launched cruise missiles. Can these be adapted for the F-21?
Michael N. Kelley: That is a subject of a government-to-government dialogue. We have a very successful record of accomplishments with various integrations undertaken. We have worked with Israel quite often and have integrated the indigenous weapons on F-16s and the F-35. There are non-US weapons going on the F-35 as well. But, in every case, there has always been a dialogue between the governments. I see nothing really standing in the way of India doing indigenous weapons on the F-21, but like all those other countries, it was always a dialogue that facilitated it. Technically, the solution is a viable one.
Q. We would interpret your statement of proposing game-changing defence partnerships that benefit multiple stakeholders in India, the US and beyond. How vast could these ties be, and what if an irate Moscow starts dragging its feet on spares? Where does that leave India in the interim in terms of military security?
Michael N. Kelley: Our goal is to support self-reliance in India for defence. Partnership with Tata is creating an ecosystem of suppliers in India that will help create the self-reliance in the fighter sector, and we are committed to those decisions. Historically, India has maintained a balance in its sources of defence supply, and I think over the years, the wisdom of that policy has proved valuable. There has always been a mix of Western and Russian aircraft in the inventory, and India has maintained the balance and always made the best use of resources and capability at its disposal. A diversity of supply in the Indian defence arena will help mitigate any supply chain issues that might exist. If you consider a self-reliant India, then dependence on foreign sources of supply ceases to be an issue.
Brett Medlin: Considering the current context from a spares point of view, it is not just a significant indigenous content and technology transfer that comes with the F-21 from a production standpoint. Once production capacity is built up, logically, the sources of supply are going to be coming from the Indian industry. The F-21 is the best path in our view to atma nirbharta– a self-reliant India- and puts India in a true sovereign position to sustain its own supply of spare parts in the future.
Q. Are there any offsets included in the bid in India for the F-21?
Brett Medlin: Our reading of the Defence Acquisition procedure 2020 reduces emphasis on formal offset obligations. My view is the government’s intention to satisfy the Make in India objective, which would otherwise be a pseudo-direct offset, through indigenous content and through technology transfer. Those threshold requirements in terms of what levels of indigenous content are required are still yet to be defined because the procurement models are yet to be defined for MRFA. We remain in discussions as the competition gets formalised.
Michael N. Kelley: I think the change in the DAP is a wise one. A direct offset, things that are focused on the product being procured, really have the most benefits for the country not just in terms of bringing the jobs in for production, but in the long term, on the sustainment side, having the know-how present in the country not only in terms of production capability but also in the aftermarket for repairs. Having the local capability, capacity and aftermarket pay huge dividends in the end. A laser focus on defence production and defence sustainment capability is good for India in the long run.
Michael Biorn: This direct offset into the supplier ecosystem is how we think F-21 brings deeper and greater advantages to the table.
Brett Medlin: This is an India focused approach, but it is also the export market. When we discussed Lockheed Martin’s portfolio of fighters, we talked about leveraging common technologies across different platforms. We also leverage similar suppliers across our different platforms. Therefore, there are a lot of synergies as we continue to grow and bolster the Indian defence industry and integrate it into our global supply chain. It presents a long-term business base in near-term and in the future from an industrial standpoint.
