he IAF has been wanting new aircraft to replace the bulk of its strength consisting

of Soviet vintage assortment of Migs, the Army wants tanks and artillery guns, and
the Navy new ships and anti-missile capability.

Technology is the key and common element in all the systems any of the three
services acquire. As the armed forces did not buy much for long, the need of the
hour also clearly implies that they buy the best and the latest to take advantage
of their late start.

As for IAF, the Air Chief pointed out that the “drivers of aerospace power are
markedly different from those” of the surface combatants. “The components of
aerospace power are inherently dependent upon technology, and technology largely
dictates performance and capability.”

He noted that an air force has to possess an advantage in terms of the quality of
equipment, and a demonstrated superiority in tactics and training, saying that
“accessibility to and availability of timely and appropriate technology is often
the impediment.”

Most of the platforms made in the 1980s did not have modular concepts; this changed
in the 1990s. In the 21st century, particularly for India, it makes sense to update
and upgrade the equipment of its armed forces. But then, most of our equipment is
of the 1970s Soviet vintage, and there is nothing much one can do than to strap on
a little booster shot here and there.

The first requirement is to have platforms, in adequate numbers, with sophisticated

onboard technology. Technology that can be pulled out like a chip or a computer
bus, and replaced with a better module periodically.
By the very nature of its requirements, an air force is powered by hi-tech.

Aircraft have to fly, operate intrusive missions, evading hostile radars and fire,
and come back safely after delivering results. If there is a war, and unfortunately
possibilities always exist, only an air force can take the war to an enemy’s
territory. It is an old principle that battles must be fought “not on my territory
but on yours.”