[3] However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank.

[5] Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a speed of Mach 1.4 to 1.5 were quickly emphasised.

A total of 86 flights were conducted prior to the X-241 sustaining considerable damage in a landing incident, when the nose undercarriage failed to extend.

[3][8] It was fitted with the same UK-manufactured Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojets that were installed in the Folland Gnat airframes that were already being manufactured, under license, by HAL.

[3][9] Before suitable, afterburning engines had been obtained, the Indian Government decided to order 16 pre-production and 60 production Maruts,[8] powered by the Orpheus 703.

The IAF was reluctant to operate a fighter aircraft with performance that was, at best, marginally better than its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunters.

[12] The Indian Government refused a proposal made by Rolls-Royce to finance further development of the Orpheus, which had been specifically aimed at producing a more suitable engine for the Marut.

[3][13] The Gas Turbine Research Establishment also pursued their own development program to improve the Orpheus without external aid, which proceeded to the testing phase with some favourable results, but proved incompatible with the Marut.

[18] Limitations within the Indian aerospace industry, which lacked the infrastructure and scientific base to successfully produce an effective indigenous combat aircraft at that time,[6] forced a heavy reliance on foreign technologies and imported components.

[2] The Marut was not only heavily dependent on foreign-sourced materials, but was more expensive to manufacture the type in India than to have imported completed aircraft.

[8] The allocation of scarce resources to reproducing components that could have been readily imported represented a high level of opportunity cost to India.

[6] The IAF reportedly showed little confidence or interest in indigenous fighter technology, having openly expressed its preference for the French-built Dassault Ouragan as an alternative.

[16] By the time the Marut entered mass production, the IAF had already purchased foreign-built fighters such as the Hawker Hunter and Sukhoi Su-7.

[14] Following on from the Marut, HAL proceeded to produce larger quantities of both European and Soviet combat aircraft under license, such as the SEPECAT Jaguar, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21, and Mikoyan MiG-27.

[19] The Marut was used in combat in a ground attack role, where its safety features such as manual controls whenever the hydraulic systems failed, and twin engines, increased survivability.

According to aviation author Pushpindar Singh, the Marut had excellent low-level flying characteristics, but its maneuverability suffered due to the lack of engine power; maintenance issues also resulted in the type being problematic in service.

[23] In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, some Maruts and Hawker Hunter aircraft were used to give close support to an Indian border post in the decisive Battle of Longewala, on the morning of 5 December 1971.

[8] Supporters such as Air Commodore Jasjit Singh pointed out that the type had performed well in the 1971 combat, and had enjoyed superior safety records to other IAF aircraft such as the Gnat.