The Cost of Cutting Corners: Why India’s Aerospace Ecosystem Must Rethink Risk Management

In aerospace, there is no margin for error—only consequences. One failed component can ripple outward with impact, whether it’s a military drone securing a border or an agricultural UAV fertilising a crop field. And yet, the sector still faces a quiet but dangerous temptation: to cut corners. Often done in the name of expediency or cost savings, this pattern weakens safety, slows innovation, and ends up costing far more than it saves.

The False Economy of Compromise

The impact of compromise often isn’t immediate—but it’s inevitable. A malfunctioning servo motor or an uncertified flight controller might seem minor, but in high-stakes systems, such oversights can trigger complete mission failures.

One persistent pressure point is lead time. To meet aggressive timelines, firms sometimes import uncertified flight controllers instead of waiting the 8–12 weeks for CSIR-NAL-tested options. On paper, it looks efficient. But in practice, it opens up risks that are difficult to track and impossible to ignore.

Material substitutions are another silent threat. Swapping aerospace-grade carbon fibre for lower-spec alternatives may reduce unit costs but can raise fatigue failure rates significantly—compromising not just performance but long-term reliability.

Systemic Risk, National Implications

The implications of this culture of shortcuts extend beyond individual companies. Many UAV manufacturers continue to source subsystems from global vendors—even for mission-sensitive applications. When global supply chains are disrupted—as they were during the Ukraine conflict—improvised fixes become operational liabilities.

Domestically, incidents involving uncertified or mismatched components risk eroding confidence in Indian-made platforms. This not only stifles local innovation but perpetuates the perception that “Made in India” means compromised quality—despite ample evidence to the contrary, including certified components that already meet or exceed global benchmarks.

Reframing the Risk Conversation

This isn’t a call for more red tape—it’s a call for better alignment between risk, responsibility, and reward. A tiered certification approach could help. Mission-critical systems—especially for defence, medical logistics, or high-altitude ops—should carry mandatory CSIR-NAL or DGCA certification with batch-level traceability. For less critical use-cases, a robust self-certification regime backed by independent audits could suffice.

What’s also needed is ecosystem-wide infrastructure. India could benefit from shared regional testing facilities—say, a drone corridor in the Rajasthan desert for thermal testing, or propulsion validation hubs in high-altitude zones. These would allow even early-stage teams to access reliable testbeds without prohibitive costs.

Transparency must be another cornerstone. Anonymised field incident reporting, similar to the civil aviation sector, would help the industry learn collectively, rather than letting each firm reinvent the same safety lessons.

Incentives that Reward Reliability

Changing behaviour requires aligned incentives. One powerful tool is policy-linked funding. PLI bonuses or tax benefits could be tied to the use of certified, traceable components. Insurance providers, too, can help shift norms—offering preferential rates to fleets built with DGCA-validated subsystems.

Globally, it’s not uncommon for aerospace firms to allocate up to 25% of development budgets to failure-mode testing, often supported by government R&D credits. India could adopt similar strategies: 200% weighted deductions on aerospace testing costs, or a Rs. 500-crore “Aerospace Resilience Fund” to support MSMEs in achieving certification. Proposals like these would require coordinated government backing, but the potential payoffs in safety, quality, and global competitiveness are significant.

These are not expenses—they’re investments in reliability, trust, and long-term capability.

Moving Forward, Together

India’s aerospace ecosystem stands at a critical inflection point. We have the engineering talent, the demand drivers, and the geopolitical momentum. What’s needed now is a cultural shift—a shared belief that reliability is not a tradeoff but a foundation.

If the next decade is to belong to Indian aerospace, it will not be because we found the cheapest way forward. It will be because we chose the strongest path: one that prioritises safety, resilience, and trust.

Clients and partners must demand clarity around component origin and certification. Forums like the Drone Federation of India offer powerful platforms to collaborate and evolve standards. And as a community, we must take on the responsibility of educating end users—buyers, regulators, investors—on why traceable, certified components are essential, not optional.

Aerospace is unforgiving. There are no shortcuts—only shorter lifespans. But with the right incentives, infrastructure, and intent, India can build not just drones, but an ecosystem that earns trust at home and competitiveness abroad.