How India's Su-30MKI Struggles Under Strict Russian Restrictions While China Freely Used Reverse Engineering to Develop J11 and J-16

India's reliance on Russian technology for its Su-30MKI fighter jet fleet has exposed a significant contrast in military technology independence compared to China. While India faces strict limitations on modifying its aircraft due to Russian oversight, China has successfully reverse-engineered and upgraded similar Russian jets with domestically developed technology.

India, a long-standing partner of Russia in defence procurement, operates one of the largest Su-30MKI fleets outside of Russia. However, modifying these aircraft, even for minor adjustments, requires Russian approval to maintain warranty and support agreements. This restriction stems from the original technology transfer agreements, which granted India the license to manufacture the jets but included stringent clauses on alterations.

Unauthorized modifications could void the warranty, potentially leading to maintenance and upgrade challenges. India's dependence on Russia for spare parts further complicates the situation, as any unauthorized changes could disrupt the supply chain. Additionally, Russia's technical support, essential for complex systems like avionics and engines, might be withdrawn if modifications are made without consent.

This dependency has become a point of concern, particularly as India aims to increase indigenous content in its defence systems. Although the Su-30MKI is assembled in India by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), it still relies heavily on Russian components, including the AL-31FP engines, which are subject to strict Russian control for maintenance and upgrades.

In stark contrast, China adopted a different approach with the Su-27/30 series, the same family of aircraft from which the Su-30MKI originates. China not only reverse-engineered the Su-27 but also developed its own advanced derivatives, the J-11 and J-16. By replacing Russian components with indigenous technology, such as engines, radars, and avionics, China has achieved a high degree of self-reliance in this area.

This self-sufficiency allows China to bypass Russian oversight and reduce its dependence on foreign technology. With complete control over the technology, China can now offer these jets on the international market, competing directly with Russian models.

China's autonomy in this domain provides a strategic advantage, enabling them to customize aircraft to their specific operational needs and potentially export these technologies. India, on the other hand, has been more cautious in this regard due to its international alliances and obligations.

India has been engaged in discussions with Russia to gain more freedom in modifying its aircraft, but progress has been slow due to geopolitical factors and the complexities of defence contracts.

The contrasting approaches of India and China to the Su-30 series highlight the critical importance of technological sovereignty in defence strategy. While India navigates the limitations of its agreements, the focus on increasing indigenization in its military capabilities continues to grow, aiming to reduce such dependencies in the future.

 

[Rp]

We need to develop independent EWS, weaponry, AESA, etc., as we are capable. Henceforth, all agreements need to be renegotiated. Trying to tie our hands with protective clauses won't help us.

We have China, who reverse engineers every tech to produce cheaper alternatives with improvements derived through independent R&D.

The time has come to break the shackles as our own production and tech is cost-effective. This also defines a stable supply chain and, in the future, superior tech improvements over supplied aircraft. All suppliers need to understand that tech support is an essential part of the contract and any tech has a risk of obsolescence down the road.

Evolving tech is derived from our own independent R&D, and India needs to move away from the monopoly practices of suppliers silently. TEJAS has shown us the way for sure.

 

[vvgnag6933]

Isn’t it the case that, if India wanted to, then it too could have reverse engineered the aircraft? Agreements with the Russians, I suppose, apply to the aircraft they have supplied or licensed to be built in India, not to anything India itself develops (including based on reverse engineering.But then reverse engineering would be seen as bad faith and India doesn’t want to damage its reputation and its relationship with Russia… not that such considerations have stopped the Chinese.

We are no doubt fools and fooled. Our people who negotiate, succumb into pressures. We must come out of these foreign technology suppliers as soon as possible. When russia approaches for any selling, india must settle score for earlier products sold and allow tech transfer, then only buy products from them, whether it is russia or US.

 

[Raja Raja Cholan]

The key point to note in this article is that China has progressed in reverse engineering and enhanced China-made fighter aircraft with domestically developed technologies. While it is illegal and unethical to copy technologies through stealing, then smuggling it to China, using inside contacts by awarding monetary rewards, employing honey trap tactics from another country is certainly not the correct thing to do. However, Indian engineers have been involved in licenced manufacturing or carrying out major servicing of fighter aircraft in India. During this long period of local manufacturing, the engineers involved could have acquired adequate knowledge of technologies incorporated in these fighter aircraft. We don't have to employ Chinese dirty tactics, but through observation and hands-on experience, our engineers should have carried out. Maybe they may have gathered substantial information that was helpful in realising Tejas and its advanced variants. Just my thoughts.