To be an Asian tiger, you have to be bold. And with neighbours like China and North Korea, you also have to have strong defences. Add to that nationalistic tendencies, regional ambition to be master of a high- technology industry such as aerospace, and the fact that many of the world's main arms sellers are fairly choosy about who gets what in Asia, and it is little wonder that many nations in the region spend heavily on developing indigenous combat aircraft.
Sometimes, however, the interests and ambitions of industry triumph over the needs of the military to a dangerous extent. The Asian tigers have found the advanced fighter a tricky beast to tangle with - little wonder given the number of more experienced manufacturing nations which have failed the same test over the years.
It is true that the current financial crisis has unexpectedly put the squeeze on Asia-Pacific defence spending, and that plenty of other countries have backed aerospace losers for ulterior motives - but that does not excuse Asia for doing so too.
Two projects stand out as examples of what happens when ambition or vested interests get the better of common sense: India's LCA and the South Korean light fighter project.
The rationale behind the LCA was clear enough to begin with. India needed to replace its large MiG-21 fleet, and saw the opportunity to develop an indigenous lightweight fighter which might be cheaper than Western alternatives, more reliable than Russian products, and not subject to supply embargo.
India could have bought the MiG-29M, an advanced variant of the MiG-29 already in service with its air force. Instead, it decided to go it alone with the LCA, which has yet to fly and which is unlikely to be significantly better than the now-abandoned MiG-29M. Following India's nuclear tests and subsequent withdrawal of US technical assistance, particularly on developing the flight control system, the LCA faces even further delays. So much for technological independence and keeping the air force's teeth well and truly sharpened when it needs them.
The idea of indigenously developing an aircraft like the LCA may be an attractive one, but in a world with plenty of good advanced light fighter designs, the cost can be too high - especially as the real chances of exporting the eventual product to defray that cost are low.
Nevertheless, South Korea seems keen to follow the same route. Industry is infamously the plaything of politicians in South Korea, which may explain the decision to develop its own light fighter/advanced trainer. But with a local manufacturer leading, a strong foreign aerospace par- tner in tow, and a launch order from the country's air force, one such project might seem reasonable.
Even the wildest optimists in that industry, however, must be asking just why a nation the size of South Korea would need two such projects: the Dasa/Hyundai Mako and Samsung/Lockheed Martin KTX-2. It is the latter aircraft that the South Korean air force wants, but local industrial giant Hyundai has decided nonetheless to back Dasa's Mako - although it has yet to be launched, or find a customer.
The motives for indigenously developing combat aircraft are clear and valid. It is the method that needs more thought. Aircraft should be built to fulfil a well-defined need, not to justify an industry, however desirable that may seem. It is a lesson other countries have learned the hard way. Most Asian nations have air forces too small to justify development of a fighter purely to satisfy local requirements, and few foreign partners can bring domestic orders to the table along with their transferable technology.
These countries need to consider whether leadership of a vulnerable indigenous project is really as valuable to their industry as a junior position on an established programme - and, indeed, whether they can afford the risk of being in the fighter development business.That said, Western nations should take note of the potential on offer in Asia and the consolidators of the world defence aviation market should not ignore the Asian manufacturers and their ambitions. Beware, though, of feeding an ambition that may eventually be harmed by the very territory in which it is nurtured.
Source: Flight International
