India's $7B AMCA Engine Deal with SAFRAN Ignites Fierce Debate on French Firm's Historical Tech-Sharing Failures

India's $7B AMCA Engine Deal with SAFRAN Ignites Fierce Debate on French Firm's Historical Tech-Sharing Failures


Recent reports of a potential agreement valued at approximately $7 billion (around ₹61,000 crore) between India and French aerospace leader SAFRAN has sparked a significant debate within the nation's defence community.

The deal focuses on the joint development of a powerful new jet engine for India's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), a fifth-generation stealth fighter program.

While the partnership is being hailed as a major step towards modernising the Indian Air Force, it has also revived concerns over SAFRAN's past record on technology transfer.

Proponents of the deal point to the long and generally successful partnership between SAFRAN and India's state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). This collaboration has been vital for India's helicopter fleet.

The Shakti engine, co-developed by the two firms, is the proven powerplant for the Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH-Dhruv), the Light Combat Helicopter (LCH), and the Light Utility Helicopter (LUH).

Having produced over 350 units in Bengaluru, the engine has demonstrated its reliability in extreme conditions, from the high altitudes of the Himalayas to maritime environments.

This established trust is a key reason SAFRAN is seen as a dependable partner for the ambitious AMCA project.

However, a cloud of scepticism hangs over the agreement, stemming from SAFRAN's past performance on technology sharing. Critics highlight that the transfer of technology (ToT) for the very same Shakti engine was reportedly delayed by nearly two decades.

This delay hampered HAL's ability to produce and maintain the engines independently, leading to continued reliance on imported components, which increased both costs and logistical challenges for India's defence forces.

This history has made many experts cautious, questioning whether the new promises of full technology sharing will be fulfilled in a timely manner.

The debate is deeply connected to India's overarching national policy of "Aatmanirbhar Bharat," or a self-reliant India. The nation's past struggles with developing its own jet engine, most notably the indigenous Kaveri engine program, have created wariness about becoming overly dependent on foreign partners for critical defence technology.

The AMCA is a flagship program for India's aerospace ambitions, and any restrictions or delays in engine technology could critically undermine the ability of the DRDO's Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) to build a self-sustaining engine manufacturing ecosystem.

Supporters of the deal argue that the current terms directly address these historical concerns. The agreement for the new 120-kilonewton (kN) thrust engine reportedly includes the complete transfer of technology and, crucially, full intellectual property rights (IPR).

Granting India IPR would be a significant milestone, allowing the country to not only manufacture the engines domestically but also to modify, upgrade, and potentially export them in the future without foreign oversight.

This is seen as a genuine opportunity for India to become a global hub for advanced jet engine production.

The sheer scale of SAFRAN's involvement in India's military aviation underscores the importance of this deal. Beyond the AMCA, the co-developed engine technology is expected to be adapted for other platforms.

There is a projected demand for nearly 400 engines for the LUH and LCH fleets, in addition to future orders for 200 ALH-Dhruv helicopters and 400 units of the new Indian Multi-Role Helicopter (IMRH).

This extensive requirement makes a robust and complete technology transfer essential for cost-effective manufacturing and long-term operational readiness.

Ultimately, the SAFRAN partnership represents a critical balancing act for India—leveraging essential foreign expertise while vigorously pursuing the goal of self-reliance.

While the French firm's commitment to full technology transfer and IPR for the AMCA program is a source of confidence, the defence community remains watchful.

The success of this multi-billion dollar venture will depend entirely on SAFRAN's ability to deliver on its promises, which could finally enable India to achieve its long-held ambition of mastering jet engine technology.
 
Bottom line is that without competition nobody transfers technology. If DRDO-HAL have selected Safran, then the private companies (L&T, Tata, Bharat Forge) must form a JV and tie up with Rolls Royce to develop an engine in parallel. The government should select the better of the two engines which will be so developed. This way, India will be able to make the most out of the foreign partnerships. This model has actually already been applied to the AMCA development and there is no reason why it can’t be applied to the engine development.
 
Yes, I doubt Safran will manufacture hot core section critical components in Bharat. Most likely, it will manufacture these critical components in France and supply them to GTRE, and will hold some critical components manufacturing at Safran's plant engine division. Safran has also established its engine manufacturing components plant in Hyderabad.

Even if it is manufactured in Bharat, it will be manufactured in Safran's Hyderabad plant, and it's likely they will keep control of these components. What is needed is manufacturing all components from the prototype of the engine in Bharat by local private vendors, instead of manufacturing in France. The same prototype engine should be tested this way. The ecosystem will get developed by the time the engine is certified and enters production.

Mark my words, Safran will hold some critical components of the hot core section and will not share ToT. I even doubt Safran will retain joint IPR for the engine and even royalties for the export of the engine. The question is, the project cost is ₹61,000 crore. If all the cost is going to be paid by Bharat, then why does Safran want conditions? They are just consultants; they will be paid their fee for the development of their work share. France is likely to use this tech developed from the AMCA Engine project for the FCAS program.
 
If only HAL DRDO had smart, intelligent engineers, India would have made the Kaveri engine without requesting or begging others.
 
@sanket
Unless France prepared to make all components in India …. No deal
That too from prototype, and each and every (even nut bolts) component (including know-how and know-why) should be manufactured by local vendors from Bharat and not by Safran's local Hyderabad plant. My fear is Safran may hold some critical tech as well as components for manufacturing. France may promise big, big things before winning the deal, and its true colour will be seen after signing the deal. Even in the Kaveri offset under 36 Rafale purchase, Safran demanded an extra $500 Mn and royalties per engine.
 
Danger in RR proposal is that American components and their influence comes with it. Hence RR is to be accepted only if everything that is hardware and software is manufactured in India without reservations.
 
Hope it doesn't get the fate of FGFA or Mirage upgrades, like we fund the engine development and the key component comes from France. Meanwhile, France is happily able to get a free engine for their 6th-gen program with our money. 10+ years and by that time, those who watch Rafale now will mostly have met their ends.
 
If only HAL DRDO had smart, intelligent engineers, India would have made the Kaveri engine without requesting or begging others.
Without a testing facility, without a testbed, and without proper funding, stop blaming PSUs when the government's intention is not clear. In a JV, they can spend 7 billion, but for an indigenous engine, they can't spend even one billion. A soldier can't win a war without arms.
 
The only way to ensure timeliness, 100% TOT, and IPR, etc., is to make staggered payments as the project progresses, and to make full payment (the major part) only upon successful completion. Disagreement of any vendor—Safran or RR—to such a clause will only make their intentions doubtful and not acceptable.
 
More than being sceptical of Safran, the so called defence analysts would do better by being more sceptic of what the government of India does next.
If you task jokers with receiving critical technologies, you will have vendors making a fool of you.

If the government has an iota of smartness left, it would not put all its eggs in the DPSU's basket, something it has been doing all along in the name of failed aatmanirbharta project.
 
The only way to ensure timeliness, 100% TOT, and IPR, etc., is to make staggered payments as the project progresses, and to make full payment (the major part) only upon successful completion. Disagreement of any vendor—Safran or RR—to such a clause will only make their intentions doubtful and not acceptable.
That is always the case. But problem is GTRE. They can't absorb the tech even if given on a silver platter.
 
Cannot trust SAFRAN for ToT completely; past experience shows they always hold off some critical pieces.
 
We wanted a 120 kN engine for supercruising the jet without afterburner. Do you think they are able to do it? Also, they did not clarify if it will incorporate an adaptive cycle feature or not, where the US, Russia, and UK are working on high-thrust and powerful adaptive cycle engines. Biggest blunder done by the inefficient Government of India.
 
Cannot trust SAFRAN for ToT completely; past experience shows they always hold off some critical pieces.
Past experience shows that they will strictly stick to the contract document. If they give it in writing, they will do it. So this one depends on our lawyers as much as our scientists. Make a water tight agreement with no ambiguities. If they sign that agreement, we can relax. Unlike Russia and US, France always sticks to the written words.
 
We wanted a 120 kN engine for supercruising the jet without afterburner. Do you think they are able to do it? Also, they did not clarify if it will incorporate an adaptive cycle feature or not, where the US, Russia, and UK are working on high-thrust and powerful adaptive cycle engines. Biggest blunder done by the inefficient Government of India.
120 kN is the max output, with afterburner. And this is the best decision by our GoI. Can't trust the Russkies and US is not ready to give the tech. And UK doesn't have any tech. And GTRE can't make it. So France is the best choice.
 
I did not understand why the Japanese engine was not considered. It was the best engine.
US managed to get Japan to ditch its fighter jet programmes even for its own military. So do you really think Japan was the right choice? In fact, even after Parrikar ji requested Japan for the submarine deal, they refused to even participate. And of course, they haven't made any operational jet engine till now so doubts would persist.
 
120 kN is the max output, with afterburner. And this is the best decision by our GoI. Can't trust the Russkies and US is not ready to give the tech. And UK doesn't have any tech. And GTRE can't make it. So France is the best choice.
Then why GTRE director & DRDO chairman confirmed that this 120kN engine is to supercruise the jet withoit afterburner. And also told that it will skip 5th gen engine for 6th gen Adaptive cycle engine. Can you tell me why promised too much?
 
Hope Safran avoids making a U-turn. While they may agree to terms now, once the delivery time arrives, they are likely to escalate costs and obstruct technology transfer. India must exercise caution, as shifting governments and rapidly changing geopolitical developments occur every month.
 
120 kN is the max output, with afterburner. And this is the best decision by our GoI. Can't trust the Russkies and US is not ready to give the tech. And UK doesn't have any tech. And GTRE can't make it. So France is the best choice.
The Brits have everything except money. Rolls-Royce already leads in the civilian market, something Russia failed in. It was Rolls-Royce that made the core for the Eurojet and A400M engine.

It was the Brits who made the world's first civilian jetliner. The learnings from that failure are what helped Boeing excel.
 
India might have asked SAFRAN to manufacture the required components in India otherwise it would haven't done this huge deal.
 
I did not understand why the Japanese engine was not considered. It was the best engine.
Japan has been reluctant to grow relations with India in military cooperation. The sale of ShinMaywa US-2 could've been a good start, but it failed. Also, many here have already mentioned Japan's refusal to participate in any of the Indian Navy's submarine tenders. Many Japan and anime "fanboys" in India might celebrate Japan as India's best friend, but the truth is, Japan is just a business partner, not a friend. It only wants to grab the Indian market.
 
The brits were offering a variant that can be put on civilian airplanes as well right?
Why did they lose?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
5,408
Messages
57,772
Members
4,105
Latest member
Soubhadra
Back
Top