MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

[Mort Walker]

This thread has been going on for a while now, and will soon reach 72. Just posting this LM F-21 link which I'm not sure hasn't been posted already:

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/f-21.html

[Karan M]

Operating costs will be as high as the MKI, with only 1 advantage, that of being a single seater. High RCS as well, with no apparent RCS reduction features or RAM treatment that we know of.

It has several RCS reduction features and RAM treatment but with an aircraft of that design and size, you can only do so much.

[Karan M]

What the IAF chief is really saying is that Russian R-27 & R-77 AAMs do not give the IAF a technological edge over the PAF.

R-27 AE and R77-1 are now in development/service respectively. Not Meteor equivalents, but still better than ER/R-77 respectively.

[Vips]

What if the the "better" R-27 AE and R77-1 still prove inadequate? Its clear that russians are lagging behing the rest of the world in A2A missiles.

[Karan M]

We don't know what will prove adequate. AMRAAM-D exists, and now so does AIM-260 in development. PL-15 exists as well, PL-21 is in development.
IAF having emergency purchase powers bypassing MOD is the only real silver lining, but even that's only $43 Mn. They can buy a handful of items in multiple orders though, if GOI signs off on it. That will get you a handful of Meteors to match the PL-15s. RVV-BD matches the PL-15 in range but is a bulkier missile, more AIM-54.

[mahadevbhu]

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... ale-127622

"This first appeared in 2018 and is being reposted due to reader interest."

It is evident that this is an old article...
Anyways, F35 is not on offer unless we give up S400s, which we are not ready to...

An example of the affect that Indian arms purchases from America have on Pakistan can be seen by this editorial in Dawn.

As can be observed , the Pakistani s understand the efficacy of American arms and thus the supply chain to which India is tying itself to. This also affects the Chinese similarly and is all the better for deterring misadventures and Pulwamas. An American mmrca would be great, in my view, to keep the neighborhood peaceful. Russian arms purchases do not have anywhere near the same affect as American arms purchases do.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1537331/indo-us-arms-deal

[abhik]

We have around 400 fighters that can fire R-77 (and R-27?), so the recent re-up orders amount to only around 2 missiles per fighter. This is clearly a stop gap order and not a long term solution. Either way as an armchair gernaile I don't have much high hopes from them.

[Cain Marko]

We have around 400 fighters that can fire R-77 (and R-27?), so the recent re-up orders amount to only around 2 missiles per fighter. This is clearly a stop gap order and not a long term solution. Either way as an armchair gernaile I don't have much high hopes from them.

It's not like we don't have earlier stocks of the missiles. India has been buying the r27 over the years for example.

[Karan M]

We have around 400 fighters that can fire R-77 (and R-27?), so the recent re-up orders amount to only around 2 missiles per fighter. This is clearly a stop gap order and not a long term solution. Either way as an armchair gernaile I don't have much high hopes from them.

The Astra will be ordered in around 200-300 missiles too. That needs to be added to the calculations of around 600 missiles purchased recently. The earlier inventory of BVR missiles of various kinds will also be re-lifed at BDL.

[Karan M]

I will give a detailed reply on the Indian Naval aviation thread later but for some perspective, please read this article

I know it is from Abhijeet Iyer Mitra who is not the most trusted fella but still.... will replay in the Indian Naval Aviation thread on the specifics later.

Yaar this Mitra talks so much BS with so much confidence. He should have stuck to his hotel management stuff and taken it from there.

What in the Rafale or Mirage 2000 is not unique to the French? Does anyone think we went to all that effort to put stuff in the Su-30 for fun? Even after all that, its not easy to deploy disparate kit to the same AFB.

Yes, the JSF etc would come with its own unique kit, its logistics, its spares, would cost a bomb. But its bloody well worth it. This is a plane which can allow us to lob bombs at S-3XX/S-4XX class systems without depending on Scalp stocks! It can take out hordes of F-16s without those aircraft even knowing its knocked them out. Literally no aircraft in PAF inventory can detect it via own radar. Most in PLAAF wont be able to either.

And its available *now*, that is with deliveries to us in particular, even 4-5 years from today, being good enough. AMCA will come in 2030+. Can we wait till then alone with 4++ Gen aircraft which are going to cost as much as a JSF and not provide even a fraction of the punch?

4-5 years from now the JSF will be reasonably mature, provide a 60-70% uptime, have a good array of weapons integrated and would have been through some 3-4 deployments to the Middle East, and the Israelis would have been running them around the clock.

It is a very useful silver bullet force to acquire.

[nam]

If not IAF, IN should propose to get a sqd or two of F35. 114 MMRCA 2.0, getting Rafale for the sake of Meteor, is absolute waste of money.

Get F35 and once Meteor are integrated with F35 for Europe, upgrade the same.

It will provide an overmatch for which neither Pak nor China can provide a counter for a while. This will allow us breathing space till AMCA comes onboard.

We wanted to achieve overmatch with T50 and paid for it. And it has become a royal mess. If we really want to get F35, Trump will come up with a good excuse about S400.

IN doesn't use S400... so F35 is safe with them.

[srai]

Operating costs will be as high as the MKI, with only 1 advantage, that of being a single seater. High RCS as well, with no apparent RCS reduction features or RAM treatment that we know of.

It has several RCS reduction features and RAM treatment but with an aircraft of that design and size, you can only do so much.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-35

...
For defences against enemy tracking, the Su-35 is equipped with the L175M Khibiny-M electronic countermeasure system,[43] while engineers have applied radar-absorbent materials to the engine inlets and front stages of the engine compressor to halve the Su-35's frontal radar cross-section and minimise the detection range of enemy radars.[44]
...

[Sumeet]

While I agree that F-35 armed with Meteor/AIM-120D BVRAAM backed with Phalcons will be too much for any TSPAF or PLAAF but from a long term future perspective F-35 will really lock us in America ecosystem and make us vulnerable to temperamental WH administration especially of democratic dispensation.

Will we get rights over its Radar or EW system to do indigenous upgrade/customizations (Israelis had to bargain real hard) ? Will we be able to independently install new Indian weapons into it ?

With S-400 around, I doubt US will grant us an exception. Neither with a small order we will be part of global supply chain. F-35 for Indian Armed Forces is a very dicey decision. On contrary one may argue if its in small numbers <= 72 then it may be worth the risks considering rewards.

Also we must remember should India grow into 5T + economy in next 5-7 years, it will be difficult for any US administration to slap sanctions on us.

[Cain Marko]

I will give a detailed reply on the Indian Naval aviation thread later but for some perspective, please read this article

I know it is from Abhijeet Iyer Mitra who is not the most trusted fella but still.... will replay in the Indian Naval Aviation thread on the specifics later.

Yaar this Mitra talks so much BS with so much confidence. He should have stuck to his hotel management stuff and taken it from there.

What in the Rafale or Mirage 2000 is not unique to the French? Does anyone think we went to all that effort to put stuff in the Su-30 for fun? Even after all that, its not easy to deploy disparate kit to the same AFB.

Yes, the JSF etc would come with its own unique kit, its logistics, its spares, would cost a bomb. But its bloody well worth it. This is a plane which can allow us to lob bombs at S-3XX/S-4XX class systems without depending on Scalp stocks! It can take out hordes of F-16s without those aircraft even knowing its knocked them out. Literally no aircraft in PAF inventory can detect it via own radar. Most in PLAAF wont be able to either.

And its available *now*, that is with deliveries to us in particular, even 4-5 years from today, being good enough. AMCA will come in 2030+. Can we wait till then alone with 4++ Gen aircraft which are going to cost as much as a JSF and not provide even a fraction of the punch?

4-5 years from now the JSF will be reasonably mature, provide a 60-70% uptime, have a good array of weapons integrated and would have been through some 3-4 deployments to the Middle East, and the Israelis would have been running them around the clock.

It is a very useful silver bullet force to acquire.

+100 Karan. Since large numbers are going to be hard in terms of $s... Every single purchase should offer massive bang for the buck. A couple of stealthy, extremely capable outright vlo platforms offers tremendous supernormal ROI. Even at 5-6 billion, this will be with it imvho.

Make up the numbers and offset the dangers associated with US purchases by binging on Tejas. In any case that's why there are so many types in the iaf.

[brar_w]

It has several RCS reduction features and RAM treatment but with an aircraft of that design and size, you can only do so much.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-35

...
For defences against enemy tracking, the Su-35 is equipped with the L175M Khibiny-M electronic countermeasure system,[43] while engineers have applied radar-absorbent materials to the engine inlets and front stages of the engine compressor to halve the Su-35's frontal radar cross-section and minimise the detection range of enemy radars.[44]
...

As Karan said there has been some focus though logic would dictate that impact is likely to be marginal in most situations. In a very simplistic way, your detection range is a function of the 4th root of RCS so this means that you need a very significant (multiple orders of magnitude) reduction in RCS to get a very significant (or even tactically relevant) reduction in real world performance against modern radars. This is why stealth fighters go "above and beyond" to focus very heavily on RCS reduction with the weight, size, and cost penalty that is associated with IWB's, large internal fuel volume, stealthy recessed targeting sensors, and conformal antennas. This is also why stealth aircraft of all generations, over the decades, look so much different than non-stealth aircrafts.

It is also is the reason why slight reductions in RCS as a marketing effort have largely flopped (think F-18 Advanced Super Hornet, or Silent Eagle F-15, Avenger drone etc and other projects). If you go back in history around the 1990 time-frame and look at the ATF and more particularly the Naval ATF program you will find that Northrop Grumman damn nearly withdrew from the NATF program because the RCS requirements. They optimized their YF-23 design to much more stringent RCS requirements compared to what the USAF wanted (and what Lockheed designed F-22 to) and as such could not easily modify the design (without it essentially being a completely new aircraft) to meet the NATF requirements. Only after the USN indicated that they were willing to be flexible in terms of RCS did they propose two variants - one with canards and one without canards but with larger vertical control surfaces. Stealth is passive EW and requires a very disciplined approach to design. It is not something you can screw on or apply just like that. With 4+ generation aircraft, whatever gains you make are lost the moment you strap weapons and targeting pods on.

[Cain Marko]

Will we get rights over its Radar or EW system to do indigenous upgrade/customizations (Israelis had to bargain real hard) ? Will we be able to independently install new Indian weapons into it ?

Sumeet Saar, this is a silver bullet force. There should not be much expectation in terms of tot, customization etc. However, Israeli weapons and systems might be doable and perhaps even local ones by the time an mlu is due.

With S-400 around, I doubt US will grant us an exception. Neither with a small order we will be part of global supply chain. F-35 for Indian Armed Forces is a very dicey decision. On contrary one may argue if its in small numbers <= 72 then it may be worth the risks considering rewards.
Also we must remember should India grow into 5T + economy in next 5-7 years, it will be difficult for any US administration to slap sanctions on us.

In terms of s400, let the Navy use the bird and accept some end user restrictions. I think the US will be pliable.

[arshyam]

In terms of s400, let the Navy use the bird and accept some end user restrictions. I think the US will be pliable.

Never expected to such words on BRF... Sad.

[fanne]

Yaar this Mitra talks so much BS with so much confidence. He should have stuck to his hotel management stuff and taken it from there.

+100 Karan. Since large numbers are going to be hard in terms of $s... Every single purchase should offer massive bang for the buck. A couple of stealthy, extremely capable outright vlo platforms offers tremendous supernormal ROI. Even at 5-6 billion, this will be with it imvho.

Make up the numbers and offset the dangers associated with US purchases by binging on Tejas. In any case that's why there are so many types in the iaf.

F-35 will be far cheaper than Rafale (almost 2 could be had for 1 rafale, and just for the heck of it F-35 will be 4-5 times more potent than Rafale..at half the cost).

We do not know when and if F-35 will come. Short of that, Rafale is the best option (and other option PAK-FA is not ready). I would think PAK-FA will be Rafale + + rather than F-35 equivalent. It would be worthwhile to get F-35 even if they were costlier than Rafale. For now though, Rafale is the best bet. F-35 negotiations can and will take longer. We have to drop the F-21 and if US is willing to sell us F-21 in spite of us purchasing S400 (I have not heard one report that said that F-21/18/15/15S) are off the table since we have S400. Yes trickier for F-35 as it LO and counter LO comes into play with S400 radar, but that can be also managed (all wester EW systems will interact with S400 EW/Counter EW, but that is not stopping anyone from selling it to us). We have so far maintained secrets of Russia from west and west secret from Russia. Our F-16 have not been donated to cheen and cheeni stuff sold to west to be compromised. We are not in that business.

[Sumeet]

Actually let's move to Mil forum MRCA or some other appropriate thread before Admins nuke us although KaranM is also complicit

It's in this thread or by now we would have seen comment from brar paaji. CM ji will reply then and there.

[Cain Marko]

In terms of s400, let the Navy use the bird and accept some end user restrictions. I think the US will be pliable.

Never expected to such words on BRF... Sad.

Come now, don't be so sensitive. You think we don't have end user restrictions on other imports? So long as they are within limits, and does not affect operations, what the issue?

[Cain Marko]

Actually let's move to Mil forum MRCA or some other appropriate thread before Admins nuke us although KaranM is also complicit

It's in this thread or by now we would have seen comment from brar paaji. CM ji will reply then and there.

Okay sir, let's bail before bredators come our way

[arshyam]

Never expected to such words on BRF... Sad.

Come now, don't be so sensitive. You think we don't have end user restrictions on other imports? So long as they are within limits, and does not affect operations, what the issue?

Which fighter aircraft or other frontline offensive assets have restrictions? And what's so sexy about the F-35 that we are ready to accept restrictions so easily?

For a so-called silver bullet force, it's all the more important that we can wield it the way we want to, when we want. Meekly accepting some restrictions subject to a whimsical WH admin (and I am not just referring to Trump) is not the way to build our military might.

After the F-16 attempt by the Pa_is, there were so many discussions here that the US would have known whether the baki F-16 went down or not, and some even hinted that the US would be aware where these assets were deployed from. I vaguely recall* a mention of "approved" bases from which these fighters could be deployed from. It's one thing to expect the bakis to be subject to such nonsense (it suits us), why should we knowingly sign up for such an oversight for our own forces?

[EDITED]
* Found it:
viewtopic.php?p=2400014#p2400014
https://www.usnews.com/news/world-repor ... ment-shows

"While we understand from you that these aircraft movements were done in support of national defense objectives," Thompson wrote in the letter, "the U.S. government considers the relocation of aircraft to non-U.S. government authorized bases concerning and inconsistent with the F-16 Letter of Offer and Acceptance."

"Such actions could subject sensitive U.S.-technologies to diversion to or access by third parties, and could undermine our shared security platforms and infrastructures," Thompson wrote.

Is this is the kind of nonsense we want to subject ourselves to? Especially a "silver bullet" force that deploys from a super-expensive aircraft carrier, which due to the very definition of the asset, is not going to be built in dozens that we can manage the risk of one carrier being deployed back to the harbour? So what would be an "authorized" base for IN? The carrier, of course, and then what? Have a say on where all it can go? Maybe stay away from the Arabian sea, as it can be deployed offensively against the bakis?

Before you or anyone says I am over-thinking this, see the kind of penetrating oversight the US practices with its close allies. And just because we are already running this risk with the MH-60 acquisition does not mean we should double down and add more such constraints on ourselves.

The best defence is what we can build ourselves.

[Manish_Sharma]

Why usa is never ready to sell f 22 but exports more advanced f 35 readily?

Because f 35 is built from ground up as remotely controllable fighter.

usa by nature is control freak nation. They will monitor and spy the airforce that buys them.

Trump isn't going to be president forever. Someone like bernie or hillary will become president someday and then they will twist our arm & neck by threat of sanctions.

Never ever give US a foothold to armtwist us later.

If Balakot was done by us using American fighter instead of French Mirage; their Senate would have sanctioned us for using their fighters.

[sum]

Saar, all our indigenous jets will have Amriki powerplants for very long foreseeable future.
Also, literally all our transport fleet, Naval recon fleet, helo fleet etc are getting more Amriki and getting standardized on it

So they have us by the b@lls for ages to come

[mahadevbhu]

Which fighter aircraft or other frontline offensive assets have restrictions? And what's so sexy about the F-35 that we are ready to accept restrictions so easily?

they make Chinese and Pakistanis scared of taking panga with us. Thus leaving us in peace.

[Bart S]

Which fighter aircraft or other frontline offensive assets have restrictions? And what's so sexy about the F-35 that we are ready to accept restrictions so easily?

they make Chinese and Pakistanis scared of taking panga with us. Thus leaving us in peace.

What absurd logic. We have never had an air war with China and with Pakistan, perhaps once or twice (very briefly and limited incidents) since 1971. Even if we buy the F35s, we will never have enough numbers to deter propaganda stunts like they tried to pull off last February.

Do you seriously think that buying an expensive sanctions prone hangar queen (will probably come with a clause that it should not be used against Pakistan etc) will stop Pakistani terrorists or BAT or communal propaganda, or in the case of the Chinese the hostile actions in multilateral forums, support for and bankrolling of Paki terrorism and unfair trade practices that destroy our economy? Those are the ways that Pakis and China have decided to 'take a panga' with us, and the F35 does diddly squat in that regard.

I am all for buying US military gear where it makes sense - transport and logistics platforms, special purpose weaponry, optical and TI equipment, smart munitions, ammo, AR-15 clones etc which are much lower risk for us in an actual war.

[arshyam]

Saar, all our indigenous jets will have Amriki powerplants for very long foreseeable future.
Also, literally all our transport fleet, Naval recon fleet, helo fleet etc are getting more Amriki and getting standardized on it

So they have us by the b@lls for ages to come

Yes, one testimonial is, thanks to our reluctance to keep plugging away with the Kaveri. Doesn't mean we happily give away the other as well, do we? And for what? Some airy-fairy notion of scaring the Chinese away?

[saumitra_j]

Yaar this Mitra talks so much BS with so much confidence. It would have been running them around the clock.

It is a very useful silver bullet force to acquire.

+100 Karan. Since large numbers are going to be hard in terms of $s... Every single purchase should offer massive bang for the buck. A couple of stealthy, extremely capable outright vlo platforms offers tremendous supernormal ROI. Even at 5-6 billion, this will be with it imvho.

Make up the numbers and offset the dangers associated with US purchases by binging on Tejas. In any case that's why there are so many types in the iaf.

Sirs, I am all for acquiring it provided it works for us - see my reply here.

[UlanBatori]

Buy Bredators and mass-produce lookalikes. Look at Syrian war twitter videos and learn b4 it is too late 4 all of us. If you launch a swarm of drones, among which are 5% real Bredators, you can wipe out the enemy air defenses at very little cost. Looking at some of the downed wreckage, they look like styrofoam toys with aeromodelling engines, but they use up a radar-controlled expensive supersonic SAM. Advantage attacker. And the few Bredators are scoring nearly 100% against fixed or slow-moving targets.

The hype for F-35s is simply for chest-thumping reasons and nothing more. Sad if there are proponents high up in Defence Procurement/ Advisors to Govt who are afflicted with that, rather than cold chess-players focused on deterring/winning war.

[Cain Marko]

Come now, don't be so sensitive. You think we don't have end user restrictions on other imports? So long as they are within limits, and does not affect operations, what the issue?

Which fighter aircraft or other frontline offensive assets have restrictions? And what's so sexy about the F-35 that we are ready to accept restrictions so easily?

For a so-called silver bullet force, it's all the more important that we can wield it the way we want to, when we want. Meekly accepting some restrictions subject to a whimsical WH admin (and I am not just referring to Trump) is not the way to build our military might.

After the F-16 attempt by the Pa_is, there were so many discussions here that the US would have known whether the baki F-16 went down or not, and some even hinted that the US would be aware where these assets were deployed from. I vaguely recall* a mention of "approved" bases from which these fighters could be deployed from. It's one thing to expect the bakis to be subject to such nonsense (it suits us), why should we knowingly sign up for such an oversight for our own forces?
.

Chill Saar. Nobody is talking about agreeing to restrictions that are operational obstacles. End user agreements like inspections might happen in the interest of ipr, so let them. I'm thinking more in terms of the Navy in any case.

What prevents the tsp from using US maal against India? Yes there is some talk about it but in the ultimate analysis, tsp is weapons free and uses them as and how they wish to.

And India is no tsp. Strategically there is much more leverage to secure deals that are far less restrictive. Do remember afterall that the Tejas and probly the Amca will all have US engines. If they really wanted to pull the plug, imagine a fleet of over 200 birds being castrated. Or Indian tooling top line ships as well.

After all this deep investment with the US, why sweat now? With a mere 2 1.5 sqds? Sherke mooh mein hath daal hidiya, toh abh Kya darna. The horse has bolted Saar...

[Cain Marko]

Buy Bredators and mass-produce lookalikes. Look at Syrian war twitter videos and learn b4 it is too late 4 all of us. If you launch a swarm of drones, among which are 5% real Bredators, you can wipe out the enemy air defenses at very little cost. Looking at some of the downed wreckage, they look like styrofoam toys with aeromodelling engines, but they use up a radar-controlled expensive supersonic SAM. Advantage attacker. And the few Bredators are scoring nearly 100% against fixed or slow-moving targets.

The hype for F-35s is simply for chest-thumping reasons and nothing more. Sad if there are proponents high up in Defence Procurement/ Advisors to Govt who are afflicted with that, rather than cold chess-players focused on deterring/winning war.

UBji India's threat matrix is considerably different from Syria, no? China especially has an extremely potent GBAD not to mention naval infrastructure and assets that are increasingly formidable. Even tsp is of an order more advanced than the poor syrians.

Note that general Smirnoff is also working on 5th gen platforms. My guess is these are more geared towards China than NATO. Rest assured, if they had the dough, theyd be buying su57 instead of su35.

[arshyam]

Which fighter aircraft or other frontline offensive assets have restrictions? And what's so sexy about the F-35 that we are ready to accept restrictions so easily?

For a so-called silver bullet force, it's all the more important that we can wield it the way we want to, when we want. Meekly accepting some restrictions subject to a whimsical WH admin (and I am not just referring to Trump) is not the way to build our military might.

After the F-16 attempt by the Pa_is, there were so many discussions here that the US would have known whether the baki F-16 went down or not, and some even hinted that the US would be aware where these assets were deployed from. I vaguely recall* a mention of "approved" bases from which these fighters could be deployed from. It's one thing to expect the bakis to be subject to such nonsense (it suits us), why should we knowingly sign up for such an oversight for our own forces?
.

Chill Saar. Nobody is talking about agreeing to restrictions that are operational obstacles. End user agreements like inspections might happen in the interest of ipr, so let them. I'm thinking more in terms of the Navy in any case.

What prevents the tsp from using US maal against India? Yes there is some talk about it but in the ultimate analysis, tsp is weapons free and uses them as and how they wish to.

And India is no tsp. Strategically there is much more leverage to secure deals that are far less restrictive. Do remember afterall that the Tejas and probly the Amca will all have US engines. If they really wanted to pull the plug, imagine a fleet of over 200 birds being castrated. Or Indian tooling top line ships as well.

After all this deep investment with the US, why sweat now? With a mere 2 1.5 sqds? Sherke mooh mein hath daal hidiya, toh abh Kya darna. The horse has bolted Saar...

So the crux of your post is that since one testimonial in unkil's grip, let's work on giving the other too. Got it.

[Cain Marko]

[
So the crux of your post is that since one testimonial in unkil's grip, let's work on giving the other too. Got it.

Actually, you totally missed the point, phorget Crux. For most purposes, they already have both testimonials, giving them a little cheek is not an issue.

Again, I'd say that the danger is far greater in having an entire fleet of 275+birds at their mercy compared to a 2 dozen birds that can seriously alter the game in our favor.

[mahadevbhu]

There's a lot going on behind the scenes. In front you see Trump in front of 125k people in ahdmbad. But behind the scenes the wheels turn. India and the US are now like the US / UK - propah Allies. China has made this happen - they have scared the US no end.

The F35 is the new F16. In numbers, with all US allies. I'd like to have some of them, especially given our own AMCA is coming online much later and there's a lot of technology that has to mature for it.

[UlanBatori]

Lockheed-Martin is smart enough to see that they could make $$$$$BBBB by developing an Export Variant that is relatively EZ to maintain (just replace the engine, the wings, tails, etc every 100 hrs) so that mere Aliens can be trained to use the Hangar Sultana and chest-thump.
Re: threat matrix: How do we know? Did Syria know that the Turkish AF with its mighty F-16s, would really be using Bredators?
No matter how many F-35s India buys, (and that would drain the budget to preclude buying other maal) MOST of them could be taken out by an initial mass attack by drones. It is just easier and cheaper to make 100 combat drones for the price and upkeep cost of one F-35. The plane itself might be super-invisible and immune like the Emperor's Clothes, but what good is it if the Net-Centric Infra is taken out? War is ugly, never plays out as one plans, because the plans are invariably leaked to the enemy anyway, or figured out by smart ones on the enemy side.

BTW, I once asked someone who knows, why Smirnoff can operate 34 fighters off poorly-prepared/maintained dusty fields in distant Syria nonstop for a year with super effectiveness and not a plane crashing, but IAF record with same types of planes is not so good. His answer was surprising:
"Spares". He says the maintenance process is to keep replacing parts with new ones: but only RuAF gets really new ones. What India gets, often you can scratch the paint, and see Arabic writing: it is recycled from Libyan AF etc. Biss-boor quality.

So I say spend the $$ on buying LOTS of new parts from the Russians, and make it a point to insist on new maal. It's that simple?

Anyway, sorry OT. I think buying American fighter planes in numbers will destroy India's military independence and preparedness. And the F-35 is a particularly shocking example. India needs MANY MANY drones (no pun intended). Should india-genius manufacture 99% of them to have anywhere NEAR the numbers needed. Future air combat is going to be 99.9% drones, so draining the budget on manned fighters is stupid.

I think India has the former US problem: To get promoted to Air Marshal, one has to be a pilot with hajaar-hajaar combat aircraft pilot experiene. Pushing a joystick don't get u promoted. This is what kept USAF from investing heavily in autonomous fighter aircrat, instead validating Augustine's Law:

In the Year XXXX, the entire US Defense Budget will pay for ONE new fighter plane.

India is heading fast towards that. Biss-boor production rate of EllSeeAy to help justify more and more Shopping, too. Of course, it makes for GREAT US-India Relations. JUST like US-Turkey and US-Bakistan!

UBCN motto:

U r dead just as much from a mijjile fired by $1000 drone as by $200,000,000 Hangar Sultana

[mahadevbhu]

Well put Sir. Sure. drones. Buy drones, Buy Reapers and predators and the like. But collaborate and JV with the numero uno supply chain in town. USA.

Shit hits the fan. you will need the USA like the YouKay needed them in World War 2.

[arshyam]

Shit hits the fan. you will need the USA like the YouKay needed them in World War 2.

This sounds suspiciously similar to Nehru's approach to JFK, while IAF was sitting right across Raisina hill awaiting orders and counting the birds in the sky. To extend your point, why even have an Air force and navy, just outsource their roles to the great massa and maintain just a police force for land. All khush, hamara defense kush.

[arshyam]

[
So the crux of your post is that since one testimonial in unkil's grip, let's work on giving the other too. Got it.

Actually, you totally missed the point, phorget Crux. For most purposes, they already have both testimonials, giving them a little cheek is not an issue.

Again, I'd say that the danger is far greater in having an entire fleet of 275+birds at their mercy compared to a 2 dozen birds that can seriously alter the game in our favor.

Well, I would argue that you are comparing apples and oranges. I presume by 275+ birds, you mean the Air Force's Tejas and its derivatives. So if these birds are rendered inoperative due to sanctions, we still have a fall back in 270+ Su-30MKIs and 36 (hopefully 72 at some point) Rafales. I will ignore the ageing Jags and Mig-29s at this point. Heck, let's even ignore the Mirages. That still leaves the Air Force with a smaller, but still potent capability, that the Air Force can wield from wherever they want to, if nothing else, in a defensive role.

Now coming to the Navy, the F-35s will be deployed from an aircraft carrier. Let's say the same sanctions render these birds inoperative, then what? The entire aircraft carrier, built at a cost of billions of USD, is rendered inoperative. Given our budgetary limits and the Navy's plan of having 3 carriers with one in refit, that's 50% capability off the table right there. So like the fighters, the carrier itself becomes a dry-dock queen. One may argue that we can deploy some other aircraft from that carrier and still use it - which aircraft? If the carrier is STOBAR, we fall back on the MiG-29K, warts and all. This assumes the F-35 is qualified for STOBAR (I think the RN will ask this for its QE carriers), more importantly, the Navy opts for another STOBAR carrier, which doesn't look likely as of now. Whereas, if (and per the Navy's dreams), the carrier has EMALS, which other fighter in our inventory can launch using it? I am quite certain no American administration would allow us to qualify MiG-29Ks or any other Russian origin aircraft to launch using EMALS, so we are stuck with a force consisting of a single fighter type. Speaking of EMALS, the same sanctions might very well render the launch capability inoperative too, at which point, the type of fighter becomes moot.

Lastly, where will these stealth aircraft operate? Arabian sea and Pakistan? The current assets themselves are capable enough to take care of the pakis, not to mention the Air Force's own assets. I also assume that the "some restrictions" you were okay with do not include staying away from the Arabian sea, otherwise this point too becomes moot. So that leaves China. No F-35 can fly solo from a carrier deployed in the BoB/IOR and perform a mission near China, say ICS, and come back without refueler support. Something our Navy does not have, and the Air Force may be loath to lend given their own needs. The other alternative is for the carrier group to steam past S'pore, and launch our fighters from the southern ICS itself. Sure the fighters will now have a workable range, and may not be observable after launch, but the giant carrier would be very well visible to the Chinese since the same choke point that applies to their ingress into the IOR applies to us. Clearly, relying on airborne stealth alone is not going to help us. That leaves dealing with Chinese threats in the IOR - which we are dealing with even today with our current assets. So the F-35 is not going to bring in some superlative capability to sanitize the IOR - heck, even Rafales are good enough at that point. At least, we can use them the way we want to without worrying about it being turned off mid-air (figuratively speaking).

Lastly, the F-35 is stealthy and built to take advantage of khan's superlative network and sensory capabilities. How well it will perform without these capabilities is not yet known. But I'd wager that having sunk in a huge amount of money into the ecosystem, the amrikis are not going to let us tinker with it and install our own hardware - so either use it without n/w centric capability, which makes it an invisible white elephant (airavat?), or burrow further into the US ecosystem with more and more money so we can use it properly, but at the cost of whatever independence is left with us.

Any which way, I don't see an upside for us.

[mahadevbhu]

That is America Saar. Follow the money. If you show money to them, you can make them
1. Invade another country Iraq
2. Come to your defense - UK

The US is the only country which is willing to get involved in wars halfway across the world for "Freedom". So if you take or need to take panga with the Chinese, you need to influence the Americans to send their aircraft carrier to the SCS to tail your Vikrant / Vikramaditya carrying the JSF.

Buying stuff from them, will influence their lobbyists which will influence their lawmakers to declare war on China to support your brown bum.

That, and the JSF has XYZ capabilities and is being produced like the F16 once was. So, why not buy the new F35 since we are not looking at buying the F21.

[Kartik]

From an AW&ST article on Canada's Fighter Replacement program, one snippet that I believe is how MRCA 2.0 must be structured. If Cost is not assigned a value up front (like 20% of the total score), before shortlisting candidates, we will run into the same 2 or 3 most expensive ones and then run the risk of not being able to afford anything under the MII program.

Four companies have joined the Saab Gripen E’s proposal for the C$15-20 billion Future Fighter Capability contract in Canada, which remains in a recently extended competitive phase.

...

Saab is competing against the Lockheed Martin F-35A and Boeing F/A-18E/F for the Canadian order.

Industrial benefits represent 20% of the formula used by Public Works and Procurement Canada to select the contract winner. Cost is assigned the same value in the evaluation as industrial benefits, with overall capability forming the remaining 60% of the weighted criteria.
..

For the Canadian Fighter replacement contest

60% weightage- Overall capability
20% weightage- Cost
20% weightage- Industrial benefits

We need to come up with a somewhat similar breakup of how the scores will be assigned to the contenders for MRCA 2.0.

60% weightage- Overall capability
20% weightage- Package Cost (including Lifecycle costs and PBL)
20% weightage- Offsets and ToT

If lower costs are not incentivized, then Dassault has no real need to offer lower costs. They know they'll sail through the evaluation to the L1/L2 phase and then use the benefits of lower Package Cost, thanks to the 36 Rafales that will be in service already. But they will not be incentivized to do anything over and above that.