You forgot one little fact.
The labs in Europe and USA aren't sitting idle.
They are churning out 'solutions' as we speak.
They have higher number and better labs with magnitudes of scale higher funding.
They are also starting from a higher base than India.
The heavy optimism you spread often leads to disappointment. Because we start expecting a lot more from our resources and efforts.
It's amazing what we have achieved so far but we are not where near Europe. Heck China is no where near Europe and we are no where near China.
And the gap is increasing as the day progresses.
Actually, we are. And China's already on par with Europe (minus jet engine). Look at the level of work they are doing in something easily visible like the navy, carriers, LHDs, supply ships etc.
At this moment, India is conducting research at the same level as the US and Europe. The only difference is they have been conducting it for longer so are ahead. We need time and cross some hurdles of uncertainty, which we have all mostly crossed.
And no, we do not need the same level of funding they need because most of their funding goes into paying salaries. At $50000 to $200000 a year, their pay is simply far beyond imagining. Similar level of expertise gives you less than $15,000 per annum in DRDO. DRDO chief's salary is less than $50,000 pa, whereas LM's CEO's pay is in the tens of millions of dollars.
For a 10-year project, the combined salary of 100 high level scientists in India is just $1.5-2 million, absolute peanuts. In the US, it's as much as $200 million, a ridiculously high amount. Now think about 1000 or 5000 scientists. So that's where a huge chunk of their funding goes.
With our funds, we are currently managing 3 fighter jet R&D programs. MWF and TEDBF alone puts us on par with ongoing projects in Europe. So this story about funds being an issue is wrong. Funding is one of the few areas which scientists say are well covered for current projects. It is one of the few areas where the govt has not failed scientists. The only ones complaining about funding is the media, because they use their ognorance to create false equivalence.
As for starting from a higher base, I don't know what that means. Is it experience? There's no doubt they are ahead when it comes to real world products, but we are prototyping those same products now as well, which means we have more or less caught up. Take AMCA Mk1, it will be more advanced than the Rafale and Typhoon, and the only European equivalents (or superiors) will become available 10 years after AMCA Mk1, ie 2040. By the time AMCA Mk1 is ready, we could very well start work on something that's even better than a European next gen program for induction in 2050.
When it comes to products with smaller gestation periods, we have already caught up in some areas, like radars, sonars etc. For example, Uttam with GaN could enter service at the same time as Rafale comes with a GaN radar. Su-30MKI is currently being tested with a GaN based ECM kit, at the same time as Gripen and Rafale.