Air Marshal Ashutosh Dixit, then Chief of Integrated Defence Staff to the Chairman Chiefs of Staff Committee, recently reviewed the progress of the TEJAS MK-1A program and other indigenous aviation projects in Bangalore. The inspection highlighted both achievements and persistent challenges in India’s fighter aircraft development efforts.

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd has just received the seventh F404-IN20 engine from GE Aerospace for the TEJAS MK-1A. A minor technical issue with the sixth delivery had already delayed the program by nearly two years.

Despite two major contracts awarded to HAL for the production of 180 TEJAS MK-1A aircraft, including 10 trainer variants, deliveries under the first contract for 99 F404 engines have yet to begin. HAL has attributed the delays to GE Aerospace’s slow engine deliveries, raising concerns about the induction timeline of India’s fourth-generation fighter.

The issue is not confined to the TEJAS MK-1A. Similar concerns are now emerging over the TEJAS MK-2 and the ambitious fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft. Both programs are configured around the GE Aerospace F414-GE-INS6 turbofan engine.

India had originally planned to co-produce the engine domestically under a technology transfer agreement, but negotiations over pricing, manufacturing, and the extent of technology transfer remain unresolved. Reports indicate that GE Aerospace has sharply raised the price, quoting ₹200 crore per unit compared to the earlier estimate of ₹70-80 crore. This escalation has complicated India’s plans to induct the F414 engine into the TEJAS MK-2, the Twin Engine Deck-Based Fighter, and the AMCA MK-1.

Neither GE Aerospace nor the Indian government has officially confirmed the reported cost hike. However, negotiations reportedly extend beyond procurement. GE Aerospace is said to have sought ₹6,000 crore to establish a dedicated F414 assembly and manufacturing line in India, which would include technology transfer, licensed production, maintenance, repair, overhaul capabilities, and long-term support.

While this might appear a safe option given that the TEJAS MK-2, AMCA MK-1, and TEDBF are already designed around the F414, the rising costs and recurring delays underline India’s continued dependence on foreign propulsion technology.

This dependence has sparked debate within India’s strategic community. Many argue that greater emphasis should be placed on the AMCA MK-2 and its indigenous engine program. French engine maker Safran has proposed jointly designing a new 110-120 kN class engine specifically for the AMCA, moving away from its earlier plan to adapt Rafale’s M88 engine technology.

Rolls-Royce has also offered an ambitious proposal, including full intellectual property ownership for India of the jointly developed engine. While no official decision has been announced, reports suggest Safran currently holds an advantage in negotiations.

Co-development of fighter engines would allow India to bridge its technological gap in propulsion, an area where past efforts such as the Kaveri engine have struggled. Analysts argue that India should prioritise the indigenous engine program, keeping TEJAS MK-2 and AMCA MK-1 production limited. 

The rationale is to bypass the rising costs of the F414 package by initially importing engines directly from GE Aerospace while redirecting investment towards domestic propulsion capability. Licensed production of the F414 would not confer ownership but would provide manufacturing capability, which some believe is insufficient for long-term autonomy.

Yet, licensed production does offer long-term benefits. India plans to build hundreds of fighters over the coming decades, and the requirement for engines will run into several hundred units when spares and replacements are included. Licensed production would strengthen the domestic ecosystem, reduce dependence, and improve maintenance and life-cycle support. This approach has already been applied to platforms such as the Su-30MKI.

However, side-lining TEJAS MK-2 and AMCA MK-1 in favour of an indigenous engine program carries risks. Developing a new 110-120 kN class engine will take years, requiring design, testing, certification, and integration.

The Indian Air Force continues to face a deficit, with many legacy aircraft nearing retirement. If India limits itself to TEJAS MK-2 and AMCA MK-1 production during this period, it risks widening its capability gap. Even if the indigenous engine is developed, delays of five or six years could leave the Air Force short of modern fighters.

The reported ₹6,000 crore cost for establishing an F414 production line is substantial, especially for an initial run of 99 engines. India should negotiate for a larger production run to reduce unit costs and expand indigenous manufacturing under the agreement. Gradually increasing domestic production of non-sensitive components would also reduce life-cycle costs.

A balanced approach would involve negotiating larger production runs with GE Aerospace, maximising indigenous manufacturing and maintenance capabilities, and simultaneously investing heavily in developing the indigenous 110-120 kN class engine for AMCA MK-2.

This dual-track strategy would allow India to meet immediate requirements while building long-term autonomy in propulsion. It reflects the reality that while cost matters, local capability matters far more for strategic independence in fighter aircraft development.

Agencies