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.

 

[आक्रोशित युवक]

I still think that we should go with japanese alternatives. Overall the best performance and by the looks of it,no strings attached!! What can be better than that.

 

[Dr K Sham Sunder]

Under the current geopolitics, nothing is certain. Till last month, Trump was in love with Russia, with a hope to get a ceasefire and get Russia on his side, with a hidden intention to take on China. With that failing, he is now training his guns on Russia and threatening India, not to buy oil. In such a case, whole Europe will be with him, given their interest on Ukraine. Whether it is UK Or France, they will have to fall in line. Hence, any collaboration with UK, France and Japan is, fraught with the risk being a planned failure.

Hence, best thing is to launch an indigenous development, with a new model of management on lines of LCA or a corporate company, with enough R&D grant from government. The engine development is not going to be more complex than LCA, by any reckoning. Spending $7Billion is atrocious. Max one requires is 20,000 cr for it's development, whether in collaboration or otherwise.

Meanwhile, have one more engine under licensed production, in addition to GE414, as a fall back.

 

[智子 伊瀬]

Under the current geopolitics, nothing is certain. Till last month, Trump was in love with Russia, with a hope to get a ceasefire and get Russia on his side, with a hidden intention to take on China. With that failing, he is now training his guns on Russia and threatening India, not to buy oil. In such a case, whole Europe will be with him, given their interest on Ukraine. Whether it is UK Or France, they will have to fall in line. Hence, any collaboration with UK, France and Japan is, fraught with the risk being a planned failure.

Hence, best thing is to launch an indigenous development, with a new model of management on lines of LCA or a corporate company, with enough R&D grant from government. The engine development is not going to be more complex than LCA, by any reckoning. Spending $7Billion is atrocious. Max one requires is 20,000 cr for it's development, whether in collaboration or otherwise.

Meanwhile, have one more engine under licensed production, in addition to GE414, as a fall back.

China spent a lot of time and money to produce quality engines. This is not a technology that can be obtained immediately as soon as the next tranche comes through. That is, at this stage, cooperation with someone is necessary.

 

[Dr K Sham Sunder]

China spent a lot of time and money to produce quality engines. This is not a technology that can be obtained immediately as soon as the next tranche comes through. That is, at this stage, cooperation with someone is necessary.

Like China, we should also develop. Just developing one engine through a collaboration with SAFRAN /Rolls Royce will not ensure that we have technology for developing a different engine in future. When we develop indigenously, we develop the entire echo system. Yes, it will take a longer time. Even the AMCA being a new platform will go through time delays over what is projected. Also, MK1 will use GE414 being produced by HAL, under licensed production.

In addition to indigenous development, go for licensed production of another engine, on lines of GE414, for AMCA. The total cost will be still much less than $7 Billion.

 

[P2S2]

Under the current geopolitics, nothing is certain. Till last month, Trump was in love with Russia, with a hope to get a ceasefire and get Russia on his side, with a hidden intention to take on China. With that failing, he is now training his guns on Russia and threatening India, not to buy oil. In such a case, whole Europe will be with him, given their interest on Ukraine. Whether it is UK Or France, they will have to fall in line. Hence, any collaboration with UK, France and Japan is, fraught with the risk being a planned failure.

Hence, best thing is to launch an indigenous development, with a new model of management on lines of LCA or a corporate company, with enough R&D grant from government. The engine development is not going to be more complex than LCA, by any reckoning. Spending $7Billion is atrocious. Max one requires is 20,000 cr for it's development, whether in collaboration or otherwise.

Meanwhile, have one more engine under licensed production, in addition to GE414, as a fall back.

It is critical. There's enough talent to take off competently.

 

[智子 伊瀬]

Like China, we should also develop. Just developing one engine through a collaboration with SAFRAN /Rolls Royce will not ensure that we have technology for developing a different engine in future. When we develop indigenously, we develop the entire echo system. Yes, it will take a longer time. Even the AMCA being a new platform will go through time delays over what is projected. Also, MK1 will use GE414 being produced by HAL, under licensed production.

In addition to indigenous development, go for licensed production of another engine, on lines of GE414, for AMCA. The total cost will be still much less than $7 Billion.

It took China about 25 years to develop engines with an acceptable service life. The J-36 has three engines due to insufficient power, and even now China does not have an analogue of the PW F135. Safran is clearly interested in developing engines, since France will also need modern engines for FCAS. Russia is unlikely to transfer the technology of the latest AL-51, RR and IHI are also interesting options. South Korea has begun developing engines for its future 6th generation fighter, the Turks are also working on it, but Ankara has no experience and is an ally of Islamabad. At one time (15-18 years ago), Ukraine offered to develop engines for the Tejas and transfer their technology to India, but Delhi missed such an interesting offer and was left with nothing.

 

[Foxbat]

I still think that we should go with japanese alternatives. Overall the best performance and by the looks of it,no strings attached!! What can be better than that.

But there are articles written that the deal for AMCA Mk2 engine has been concluded with Safran. And the reason for selecting Safran specifically bcoz they have shorter timeline to produce the first engine. What I can't understand is that why is HAL and GTRE are so fond of French connections. Safran may have promised a shorter timeline but GTRE is compromising expertise, technology and long years of experience in producing aircraft engines. I would be much contented if RR or Japanese IHI would have been chosen for their long years of track record in producing advanced technology aircraft engines. I am not sure if indeed the deal is concluded with Safran and engines will be produced within the timeline of ten years. I just hope this deal with Safran will not be another fiasco like Russian fighter collaboration and GE engines F404 prolonged delays which has caused massive disruption in Tejas Mk1A production schedules. The much touted AMCA Mk2 production will be another blunder in India's ambitious dream to produce our own 5th gen fighter aircrafts without a powerful advanced technology 120kN engines.

 

[Dr K Sham Sunder]

It took China about 25 years to develop engines with an acceptable service life. The J-36 has three engines due to insufficient power, and even now China does not have an analogue of the PW F135. Safran is clearly interested in developing engines, since France will also need modern engines for FCAS. Russia is unlikely to transfer the technology of the latest AL-51, RR and IHI are also interesting options. South Korea has begun developing engines for its future 6th generation fighter, the Turks are also working on it, but Ankara has no experience and is an ally of Islamabad. At one time (15-18 years ago), Ukraine offered to develop engines for the Tejas and transfer their technology to India, but Delhi missed such an interesting offer and was left with nothing.

Let me tell you that I have worked on PTAE-7 prior to moving to ADA. I can tell you that developing a 4th generation fighter aircraft is a lot more complex than an engine. Very few countries have succeeded. ADA was formed when HAL failed with several attempts. These complex systems can't be developed by a typical DRDO lab, given the usual limitations. You need a system like ADA to manage the project at higher level, while keeping HAL as the main work centre. Wherever HAL said they can't do, ADA went out both nationally and internationally to get the required technology developed. Unless such a system comes or a corporate structure is put in place, a system of the given complexity can't be developed. Spending $7 Billion dollars is equivalent to the cost of hundred LCAs and it is absurd. Bring in all the talent within DRDO, HAL and ISRO and get support as needed from other institutions in the country and outside, as done in LCA development, we will succed. 🙏

 

[Dr K Sham Sunder]

Let me tell you that I have worked on PTAE-7 prior to moving to ADA. I can tell you that developing a 4th generation fighter aircraft is a lot more complex than an engine. Very few countries have succeeded. ADA was formed when HAL failed with several attempts. These complex systems can't be developed by a typical DRDO lab, given the usual limitations. You need a system like ADA to manage the project at higher level, while keeping HAL as the main work centre. Wherever HAL said they can't do, ADA went out both nationally and internationally to get the required technology developed. Unless such a system comes or a corporate structure is put in place, a system of the given complexity can't be developed. Spending $7 Billion dollars is equivalent to the cost of hundred LCAs and it is absurd. Bring in all the talent within DRDO, HAL and ISRO and get support as needed from other institutions in the country and outside, as done in LCA development, we will succed. 🙏

LCA Mk2 is going to be the real winner and it will become the main workhorse, for IAF. AMCA is new platform and will be in technology development mode, like LCA earlier. There is going to be enough time to develop an engine indigenously in parallel, as it is required only for Mk2 of AMCA. Get out of all these whole sale collaborations and go for indigenous development, but with a new project management structure, either on lines of LCA or a Corporate company with 51% equity from Private, 49% from govt and a 100% matching R&D grant. Private can get the best retired experts from both within the country and abroad. Either way, it will cost about 20,000 Cr.

 

[智子 伊瀬]

Let me tell you that I have worked on PTAE-7 prior to moving to ADA. I can tell you that developing a 4th generation fighter aircraft is a lot more complex than an engine. Very few countries have succeeded. ADA was formed when HAL failed with several attempts. These complex systems can't be developed by a typical DRDO lab, given the usual limitations. You need a system like ADA to manage the project at higher level, while keeping HAL as the main work centre. Wherever HAL said they can't do, ADA went out both nationally and internationally to get the required technology developed. Unless such a system comes or a corporate structure is put in place, a system of the given complexity can't be developed. Spending $7 Billion dollars is equivalent to the cost of hundred LCAs and it is absurd. Bring in all the talent within DRDO, HAL and ISRO and get support as needed from other institutions in the country and outside, as done in LCA development, we will succed. 🙏

The Swedes made the J-35 Draken, but they couldn't make the engine and had to buy it from Britain. Allso couldn't make it for the JA-37 Viggen and had to buy it from the USA, and they didn't even try to make their own engine for the JAS-39 Gripen. Israel made a 4th generation fighter(IAI Lavi), but didn't make engines for it. The Turks made a prototype of a 5th generation fighter, but they are asking for at least 8 years for engines and preferably a partner (RR or Motor Sich). South Korea will also make its own engines only by the mid-30s. I think that engines are clearly more complicated than an airframe.
It's just that conditions are changing too quickly and losing a huge amount of time is unacceptable, so a foreign partner is needed.

 

[Muthu.Kumar]

Actually it's more about the rust in drdo too. I would urge your to search online about the recommended reforms for DRDO by a committee and how DRDO pushed back against it. Highlighting the DRDOs indulgence in maintain the current things. This will give you a detailed insight into drdo ecosystem. Even recent news of DRDOs progress is result of just few of many recommended reforms being implemented in fragmentation.

Hence you see govt aiming to push private sector in defense. And industry can build world class system from scratch when earlier govt didn't invite them. Just look at how open cried when reliance was offset partner for rafael. They had to start somewhere.

And you start by small things in supply chain and then increasing expertise by absorbing ToT.
Now TATA is building semi conductor fans, fuselages for rafael, L&T is increasing shipbuilding capacity with multiple Collab with navy. Mahindra and TATA are building WHAP, ATAGS etc.. Relaince is entering into aerospace through Collab.

So, it's systematic. You can't expect industry to suddenly produce a miracle. Govt job is to create an atmosphere for innovation which it's trying its best to do. But then you have oppn creating halla over any reform. Targeting the industry itself as they know that their system will lose the hold they have over industry by red tapism.

And it's not the end. It's the start. Even mobile phones can't be built in a day. You need several parts for it and most of them were never available tech in india like semiconductor chips.

Once the fab starts running, like now IIT students designed chip has been finalised to be produced.. these things drive Innovation. Just look at the startups in drones, aviation sector.

Sir, if you would come out of political lens and look at the actual landscape of India's increasing r&d footprint, you will realise the future vision mode the govt is running on.

And this is after indian political class has made it sucidial to stop any welfare scheme and free things are almost accepted as a normal. Welfare scheme which have most misused history by Beauracrats is more than the entire defense budget of India.

So, think. And if you just wanna further a narrative without looking at it from wider systematic approach.. then nothing can't be done for you and you would even find developed nations unworthy. As they aren't as good as shown in Hollywood.

Sorry, I didn't look at thru political spectrum. In fact I didn't touch politics at all.

I'm taking about the country's mins set as a whole.

Our academia's contribution to the nation's scientific R & D is very very minuscule compared to that of the West, esp the US. Here, its quite common for Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Caltech etc. working hand in gloves with both public and private sector. India doesn't have such a robust infrastructure or platform or a framework and hence loose the best and the brightest.

Good that you brought up ISRO. I'm also saying the same. See, Somnath said that IIT-ans don't show interest to join ISRO (and ready to flee and join NASA) Of course they won't, why / how would they ?

In spite of such shortage of the best and the brightest, ISRO is achieving milestone after milestone. For eg. after the sanctions by the US which blocked India from getting the cryogenic technology from Russia, ISRO developed its own.

That is what I'm talking about. Will India do things itself only if the West refused to carry India on its shoulders?

 

[Dr K Sham Sunder]

The Swedes made the J-35 Draken, but they couldn't make the engine and had to buy it from Britain. Allso couldn't make it for the JA-37 Viggen and had to buy it from the USA, and they didn't even try to make their own engine for the JAS-39 Gripen. Israel made a 4th generation fighter(IAI Lavi), but didn't make engines for it. The Turks made a prototype of a 5th generation fighter, but they are asking for at least 8 years for engines and preferably a partner (RR or Motor Sich). South Korea will also make its own engines only by the mid-30s. I think that engines are clearly more complicated than an airframe.
It's just that conditions are changing too quickly and losing a huge amount of time is unacceptable, so a foreign partner is needed.

If you closely observe, they are all western block countries. Today, we are neither firmly in Western block or Eastern block, rightly so. Hence, what fits them doesn't fit us.

In the past, we were denied many technologies, but we did develop. Take ISRO, they have developed Cryogenic engine, which was denied by both the blocks. None of the countries mentioned have a robust Space or Nuclear program, like us. Just because, one DRDO lab has failed to develop the engine so far, doesn't mean India can't develop. Even if you go for collaboration, the same lab will be involved and there is no guarantee that they will get equipped to a stage that they can design the next engine from those inputs. The collaborators will be clever enough to keep some key things, on some pretext or the other. For example, developing single crystal blades and blisks may be from different metallurgical industry, which will not be part of such ToT. More than that, how on earth we can spend $7 Billion dollars, for a product which is just around $5 Million. If SAFRAN or RR develops, it will not cost them more than a billion dollars (200 times). Assuming they want a 100% R&D overhead, they can't charge more than $Two Billion Dollars. Here, they are exploiting your insecurity/inability to develop it indigenously. Just because, a typical DRDO lab failed to develop the engine so far doesn't mean, the country as such do not have the intrinsic abilty to develop one. Today, we have propulsion technology in GTRE, HAL Engine Design Bureau, ISRO and NAL etc. Just go and check whether there was enough interaction among them so far and whether all of them have failed? Let all of them put together say that they cannot develop within the country.

Meanwhile, L & T Aerospace has just initiated engine development. They will have no problem in hiring retired experts from both within the country and outside. In five years, they will be a force to reckon with.

What has failed us the project management. It should be either on lines of LCA - ADA Or a corporate company with enough R&D funding support from government.

Today, our GDP is $4+ Trillion. In ten years, it will be double and so on. We will be third largest economy in nominal terms. In Purchase Parity Terms, today we are at $17+ Trillion, in third position after China & USA. Today, the West has given up threatening China, because of it's financial strength. We will reach similar status in 10-15 years, if there are wars or civil wars. Then, we are a power to reckon with internationally, by default. Hence, we have to have Atmanitbarata in Engine Technology also. Once, we develop, we will be cheaper than anyone else internationally, as in our space achievements. Time we stop treating engine technology greatest on earth and think that only SAFRAN or RR or P&W only can develop.

GE414 is going to be manufactured by HAL soon, under license. It will take care of LCA Mk2 and AMCA Mk1 requirements. AMCA Mk2 is decades away. Enough time develop the engine indigenously, but under a new management structure, which integrates all strengths in the country, like we did in LCA. Not any more by a single lab, given the usual limitations. Labs are more successful in developing individual technologies, not a complex system like engine or LCA. Even ADA would have failed without active involvement of HAL, IAF, DRDO labs, CSIR labs, Academic institutions, private participation, limited consultancies from abroad etc. It is time, we bring in that type of management structure, to address this engine problem. Since I happen to work on engine development for a decade, prior to moving to ADA for LCA project, let me tell you a fighter aircraft is a lot more complex technology to develop, compared to an engine. In an engine, each unit vis air-intake, compressor, combustion chamber, turbine, after burner etc can be individually developed and tested, unlike in aircraft where the whole system has to work in one go, for a first flight, with a pilot in cockpit.

 

[आक्रोशित युवक]

But there are articles written that the deal for AMCA Mk2 engine has been concluded with Safran. And the reason for selecting Safran specifically bcoz they have shorter timeline to produce the first engine. What I can't understand is that why is HAL and GTRE are so fond of French connections. Safran may have promised a shorter timeline but GTRE is compromising expertise, technology and long years of experience in producing aircraft engines. I would be much contented if RR or Japanese IHI would have been chosen for their long years of track record in producing advanced technology aircraft engines. I am not sure if indeed the deal is concluded with Safran and engines will be produced within the timeline of ten years. I just hope this deal with Safran will be another fiasco like Russian fighter collaboration and GE engines F404 prolonged delays which has caused massive disruption in Tejas Mk1A production schedules. The much touted AMCA Mk2 production will be another blunder in India's ambitious dream to produce our own 5th gen fighter aircrafts with powerful advanced technology 120kN engines.

Su57 deal has to go through, no matter what. Russia will give us 100% tot with Russian weapons with manufacturing in india(must)
There were reports that India is considering buying standoff planes but that's a big NO NO.
We need the know how of making planes and without it amca will stay a dream...more than mk1a,2a we need a 5th gen because at least it will ensure that our neighbours don't fool around too much on the borders.MRFA must be scrapped now. The only 4 or 4
5 gen to enter our force should be mk1a and 2a.

 

[P2S2]

The Swedes made the J-35 Draken, but they couldn't make the engine and had to buy it from Britain. Allso couldn't make it for the JA-37 Viggen and had to buy it from the USA, and they didn't even try to make their own engine for the JAS-39 Gripen. Israel made a 4th generation fighter(IAI Lavi), but didn't make engines for it. The Turks made a prototype of a 5th generation fighter, but they are asking for at least 8 years for engines and preferably a partner (RR or Motor Sich). South Korea will also make its own engines only by the mid-30s. I think that engines are clearly more complicated than an airframe.
It's just that conditions are changing too quickly and losing a huge amount of time is unacceptable, so a foreign partner is needed.

Management structures are important to direct energy to that which is lacking. I would prefer present structures but with chosen perfectionists for this upgrading. It seems wheels are moving in the right direction. Aste aste ageh hogai. With the swift surprises will be in store for any foolish aggression. Personally I'd now wish for IHI and other Japanese facing restrictive policy handicaps.