Su-30MKI: News and Discussion - 24 July 2021

[Pratyush]

The future of IAF is indigenous. This 12 airframes plus the MRFA are the last imported aircrafts for the IAF.

Within the indigenous system. The last remaining weakness is the Jet engine.

[hgupta]

No it’s not. You got the Rafale and IAF wants more of them. MoD needs to lay the law down and smack IAF around and tell them in no uncertain terms that they ain’t getting no more Rafales but more LCAs and the ORCA will be developed. We need to get more MKIs because we have a supply chain ecosystem and I still think we can convince the Russians to give us the IP rights because they need money.

[Roop]

The Mirage 2000 upgrade cost a fortune and many did rona-dhona when they saw the cost! But when Balakot happened, it was not the Su-30MKI that conducted the strike. It was the upgraded Mirage 2000I (along with the non-upgraded Mirage 2000H) that completed the mission. Not a soul did rona-dhona at that time.

I got a good laugh out of this ("not a soul did rona-dhona at that time"), but you're right.

[Pratyush]

The Indian government doesn't work the way we want it to work.

Personally, I want a fleet of 2500+ fighters for the IAF by 2045. But the way we are going. We will be lucky to have 42 squadrons by 2045.

[Rakesh]

No it’s not. You got the Rafale and IAF wants more of them. MoD needs to lay the law down and smack IAF around and tell them in no uncertain terms that they ain’t getting no more Rafales but more LCAs and the ORCA will be developed.

The PDR (Preliminary Design Review) for the Tejas Mk2 was sanctioned in November 2009. The IAF cleared the CDR (Critical Design Review) for the Tejas Mk2 on 15 November 2021. The program finally got CCS clearance on 31 August 2022. It took nearly 13 years from PDR stage to CDR stage. If it took that long for the Tejas Mk2 to reach the CDR stage, one can only imagine how long it will take the ORCA (currently in artwork/twitter fanboy stage) to develop.

ADA has its hands full with the Tejas Mk2 and the CDR for the AMCA is reportedly done and is awaiting clearance for developmental funds. In the middle of these two programs, ADA is also working on the TEDBF. Set aside the human capital for a minute, there is no financial backing for ORCA in the midst of all these programs. There is no time for this either. The squadron strength is falling and there are not enough incoming airframes to arrest the shortage.

The latest Su-30MKI squadron to be raised - No 4 Oorials - was done by pulling reserve airframes from other squadrons. Of the two remaining Bison squadrons, one will retire in 2024 and the last one in 2025. And in these next two years, a full strength Mk1A squadron will still not be operating. The MiG-29UPG will start retiring by the end of this decade. The oldest Jaguar squadrons will also start retiring around the same time. Only the Mirage 2000I/TI and the newer Jaguar squadrons will remain in active service till the early 2030s.

The planned, second tranche of 97 Tejas Mk1As are being ordered, because the MRFA will still take longer to arrive. But a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and thus the second tranche. The Mk1A is the only readily available aircraft at the moment. Everything else is khayali pulao.

"MoD needs to lay the law down and smack IAF around..." is nothing more than a sound byte, because that is not going to happen. Who in the MoD can sit across the table with Air HQ and discuss the intricacies and minutiae of modern air warfare? Please find me those good souls - because till that occurs - this suggestion is academic. Air HQ will run circles around the MoD, as they have been in this business for the past 91+ years. No one is going to "school" the IAF or Air HQ and lay down the law. MoD controls the purse strings, but air combat is entirely the IAF's domain. The IAF sets the technical requirements, not the MoD. Perfect Example - Look at the never ending saga of Air HQ trying to acquire the A330 MRTT as their new generation in-flight refueler. I believe we are in round three or four, and still no headway with the A3330 MRTT. But Air HQ shows no sign of budging, so the impasse continues.

Even this second tranche of 97 Tejas Mk1A that are being looked at, is because Air HQ has technically cleared the purchase. If they did not, even that would not come. Rajnath Singh can encourage Govt policy, but he cannot force anything down Air HQ's throat. This is not how procurement works in India. It was Air HQ that insisted on the S-400, not the Govt. The latter was just regurgitating the technical reasons of the S-400, based on what the IAF was telling the Govt. It was Air Chief Marshal VR Chaudhari who announced the second tranche of Tejas Mk1As, not the MoD. It was Air HQ that moved that proposal to the MoD. This proposal works for Air HQ, as the messaging of Atmanirbhar Bharat is being conveyed and because of the upcoming MRFA.

There are technical / geopolitical reasons as to why the IAF does not want any more Su-30MKIs than already present. Two things to consider;

1) There is a limit to how much GOTUS can continue to convince the US Congress that India is a valid partner against China. CAATSA is a Damocles sword hanging over India's neck. If we order Russian maal in large numbers (i.e. 200 additional Su-30MKIs), that sword will fall. And when it falls, it will affect a number of incoming acquisitions and platforms we currently operate. The main concern is the F404 turbofan for the Mk1A and the F414 turbofan for the Mk2. No turbofan = no aircraft. What will we do then?

2) The Su-30MKI will suffer a very high rate of attrition in the absence of effective SEAD/DEAD operations. There is no two ways about this. The IAF is not in the business of sending pilots into suicide missions. She is a beautiful bomb truck and in the air-to-air domain, she is exceptional. But she has a very large RCS. In recent exercises, between the Rafale and the Su-30MKI...the former was trouncing the latter in BVR combat. In WVR combat, it was likely balle-balle for the Rambha crews, but a Katrina pilot will ensure that he sees first, shoots first and kills first.

See this from a French Navy Rafale pilot --> https://hushkit.net/2019/11/11/flying-f ... t-veteran/

“Honestly the issue is comparing aircraft all the time. Life isn’t that easy. Combat is unfair. It’s never going to be fair. It isn’t designed to be fair. If you get into fair close combat you’re a bad pilot. Don’t put yourself in a fair fight in real life as that’s stupid. Manoeuvre — take advantage and surprise your enemy. It’s not about one individual defeating an enemy, you’re here to get results. We are result-driven personnel. It’s not all about me.

We need to get more MKIs because we have a supply chain ecosystem and I still think we can convince the Russians to give us the IP rights because they need money.

Can you please explain HOW we are planning to convince Russia to give us full IP rights of the Su-30MKI? I would love to know. Just because they "need" money, is not a valid reason.

[Rakesh]

The Mirage 2000 upgrade cost a fortune and many did rona-dhona when they saw the cost! But when Balakot happened, it was not the Su-30MKI that conducted the strike. It was the upgraded Mirage 2000I (along with the non-upgraded Mirage 2000H) that completed the mission. Not a soul did rona-dhona at that time.

I got a good laugh out of this ("not a soul did rona-dhona at that time"), but you're right.

Unfortunately it is true. You want a certain capability, then you have to cough up the cash.

This strategy of I-want-to-be-regional/global-superpower-but-will-make-the-least-minimal-investment is not going to work.

[Manish_P]

^ Not rona-dhona but a pooch.

Can upgraded Su30 MKI carry such a mission in future

[Rakesh]

^ Not rona-dhona but a pooch.

Can upgraded Su30 MKI carry such a mission in future

Compare the RCS of the F-15 Silent Eagle, with the RCS of the F-22 or the F-35. You will have your answer

There is a limitation to how much one can make a non-stealthy platform into a LO one. And you can forget VLO altogether. You are better off designing an aircraft from the ground up at that stage. Why is Northrop Grumman working on developing the B-21 Raider? Just build more B-52 Stratofortresses. That would be cheaper no?

But you can take a non-stealthy platform, partner it with a LO/VLO platform and have exceptional/effective results. See below...

Rafale and Su-30MKI together will be potent combo
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/r ... 2019-07-11
11 July 2019

"Once the Su-30MKI and the Rafale start operating together, it will be a potent combination against our adversaries, be it Pakistan or anybody else. Any adversary would be worried about such a combination," Air Force Vice-Chief Air Marshal RKS Bhadauria said in New Delhi.

"As we would be operating the planes together in future, we have also learnt how the two aircraft operated together would provide us a lethal capability in days to come," RKS Bhadauria said.

"We will have long range advanced capability along with the advanced technology. The attrition rate that will be inflicted upon the Pakistanis would be very very high," RKS Bhadauria said.

All modern, professional air forces do this; but you need both types. The USAF and USN have mastered this down to a fine science.

[hgupta]

The PDR (Preliminary Design Review) for the Tejas Mk2 was sanctioned in November 2009. The IAF cleared the CDR (Critical Design Review) for the Tejas Mk2 on 15 November 2021. The program finally got CCS clearance on 31 August 2022. It took nearly 13 years from PDR stage to CDR stage. If it took that long for the Tejas Mk2 to reach the CDR stage, one can only imagine how long it will take the ORCA (currently in artwork/twitter fanboy stage) to develop.

Have you asked why it took so long? They didn't get the funds required to make it to the CDR stage and IAF did not want the Tejas so they did everything they could to sabotage it. So I lay the blame of the delay at the feet of the IAF.

ADA has its hands full with the Tejas Mk2 and the CDR for the AMCA is reportedly done and is awaiting clearance for developmental funds. In the middle of these two programs, ADA is also working on the TEDBF. Set aside the human capital for a minute, there is no financial backing for ORCA in the midst of all these programs.

So how can we find the financial backing to buy overpricey Rafales but no financial backing for ORCA in which we would own the product and can produce it in the hundreds without paying a fortune to France. This is myopic thinking right here.

There is no time for this either. The squadron strength is falling and there are not enough incoming airframes to arrest the shortage.

The latest Su-30MKI squadron to be raised - No 4 Oorials - was done by pulling reserve airframes from other squadrons. Of the two remaining Bison squadrons, one will retire in 2024 and the last one in 2025. And in these next two years, a full strength Mk1A squadron will still not be operating. The MiG-29UPG will start retiring by the end of this decade. The oldest Jaguar squadrons will also start retiring around the same time. Only the Mirage 2000I/TI and the newer Jaguar squadrons will remain in active service till the early 2030s.

Again, I lay the blame at the feet of IAF who steadfastly refused to buy any more Tejas which was proven to be much better than the Mig-21s and Jaguars because they feared that they wouldn't get Rafales. They were so single-mindedly focused on the Rafales that they developed tunnel syndrome. They couldn't think anything else.

The planned, second tranche of 97 Tejas Mk1As are being ordered, because the MRFA will still take longer to arrive. But a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and thus the second tranche. The Mk1A is the only readily available aircraft at the moment. Everything else is khayali pulao.

Finally IAF accepted the truth. If only they had saw the light 13 years ago and make timely orders of the Tejas, we would not be in the position where our squadron numbers would be below.

"MoD needs to lay the law down and smack IAF around..." is nothing more than a sound byte, because that is not going to happen. Who in the MoD can sit across the table with Air HQ and discuss the intricacies and minutiae of modern air warfare? Please find me those good souls - because till that occurs - this suggestion is academic. Air HQ will run circles around the MoD, as they have been in this business for the past 91+ years. No one is going to "school" the IAF or Air HQ and lay down the law. MoD controls the purse strings, but air combat is entirely the IAF's domain. The IAF sets the technical requirements, not the MoD. Perfect Example - Look at the never ending saga of Air HQ trying to acquire the A330 MRTT as their new generation in-flight refueler. I believe we are in round three or four, and still no headway with the A3330 MRTT. But Air HQ shows no sign of budging, so the impasse continues.

Even this second tranche of 97 Tejas Mk1A that are being looked at, is because Air HQ has technically cleared the purchase. If they did not, even that would not come. Rajnath Singh can encourage Govt policy, but he cannot force anything down Air HQ's throat. This is not how procurement works in India. It was Air HQ that insisted on the S-400, not the Govt. The latter was just regurgitating the technical reasons of the S-400, based on what the IAF was telling the Govt. It was Air Chief Marshal VR Chaudhari who announced the second tranche of Tejas Mk1As, not the MoD. It was Air HQ that moved that proposal to the MoD. This proposal works for Air HQ, as the messaging of Atmanirbhar Bharat is being conveyed and because of the upcoming MRFA.

Sorry I don't buy this. The one who holds the purse strings holds the power. Always have been. If you don't control the purse, you don't get to shape the narrative. Part of the problem lies with the seniority structure. MoD needs to appoint military commanders based on their abilities and willingness to transform the military into a lean fighting machine not based on their seniority. That is the only way to get things done.

There are technical / geopolitical reasons as to why the IAF does not want any more Su-30MKIs than already present. Two things to consider;

1) There is a limit to how much GOTUS can continue to convince the US Congress that India is a valid partner against China. CAATSA is a Damocles sword hanging over India's neck. If we order Russian maal in large numbers (i.e. 200 additional Su-30MKIs), that sword will fall. And when it falls, it will affect a number of incoming acquisitions and platforms we currently operate. The main concern is the F404 turbofan for the Mk1A and the F414 turbofan for the Mk2. No turbofan = no aircraft. What will we do then?

2) The Su-30MKI will suffer a very high rate of attrition in the absence of effective SEAD/DEAD operations. There is no two ways about this. The IAF is not in the business of sending pilots into suicide missions. She is a beautiful bomb truck and in the air-to-air domain, she is exceptional. But she has a very large RCS. In recent exercises, between the Rafale and the Su-30MKI...the former was trouncing the latter in BVR combat. In WVR combat, it was likely balle-balle for the Rambha crews, but a Katrina pilot will ensure that he sees first, shoots first and kills first.

As that it may be, there is a saying, quantity has its own quality. Take a look at the Russian-Ukraine conflict, despite overwhelming air superiority, Russia is not able to establish complete air dominance due to NATO interference and etc. Russia has overcome that by coming up with superior numbers. Against China, we don't even have that and yet China fields better fighters than what we currently have with the exceptions of the MKIs and Rafales but we don't have the numbers. How do we get the numbers? We need to develop our own fighters. IAF should have seen this coming a long time ago. THis forum saw this a long time ago. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that part out.

Can you please explain HOW we are planning to convince Russia to give us full IP rights of the Su-30MKI? I would love to know. Just because they "need" money, is not a valid reason.

Sure it is a valid reason. The other reason is that they have their own program which is the Su-35MK which is different from the Su-30MKIs. No one else is buying the Su-30MKIs which have canards and thrust vectoring engines. Since the Su-30MKI is a dead end product, Russia has nothing to lose by selling the IP rights to it because no else aside from India will buy it. Russia gets to make more money off it and India gets to make more of these and keep the spares coming in keeping it as the backbone of the IAF strength, making it a win win situation.

If MoD pushes IAF to do the ORCA as the successor to the Rafale and promise IAF that it will buy at least 250 of these, I am sure IAF will get behind it. We are not going to get more Rafales until 8-9 years later. If we go for ORCA, we can get those planes in about 12-13 years because of the commonality with TEBDF and Tejas. So the cost will only be another 2-3 years in exchange for complete elimination of dependence on foreign fighters.

[BenG]

Have you asked why it took so long? They didn't get the funds required to make it to the CDR stage and IAF did not want the Tejas so they did everything they could to sabotage it. So I lay the blame of the delay at the feet of the IAF.

Yup! This Happened!

So how can we find the financial backing to buy overpricey Rafales but no financial backing for ORCA in which we would own the product and can produce it in the hundreds without paying a fortune to France. This is myopic thinking right here.

Again, I lay the blame at the feet of IAF who steadfastly refused to buy any more Tejas which was proven to be much better than the Mig-21s and Jaguars because they feared that they wouldn't get Rafales. They were so single-mindedly focused on the Rafales that they developed tunnel syndrome. They couldn't think anything else.

Well, IAF, MoD and HAL were all quite myopic then. They thought MMRCA with 50% offset will be the solution to building aerospace industry in India. HAL too did not actively work on Tejas as it does now. DRDO/ADA cannot be absolved of this myopic tunnel view problem. They initially proposed MCA as a tailless twin-engine fighter without internal bays. It took 5 more years by around 2013 that they settled on the design with internal carriage. When Indian Navy asked for a Naval AMCA, they sat on it for 3 years till 2016 and Indian Navy sent out a requirement for MRCBF. They finally offered TEDBF in 2020 based on MRCBF. DRDO/ADA could have offered a Naval version of AMCA with concealed missiles without internal bays. They could have followed Rafale development path of marine version before air force version. But their current design TEDBF is just Rafale with wing-folding. All the leadership in India has been indoctrinated in babu culture.

Sorry I don't buy this. The one who holds the purse strings holds the power. Always have been. If you don't control the purse, you don't get to shape the narrative. Part of the problem lies with the seniority structure. MoD needs to appoint military commanders based on their abilities and willingness to transform the military into a lean fighting machine not based on their seniority. That is the only way to get things done.

I think its juvenile to think that Indian politicians can bring professionalism to armed forces. The best politicians can do is pick the top brass from a pool of Seniors which consists of other branches too instead of the fighter core. I think this will be solved with Chief of defense Staff appointment to a degree.

As that it may be, there is a saying, quantity has its own quality. Take a look at the Russian-Ukraine conflict, despite overwhelming air superiority, Russia is not able to establish complete air dominance due to NATO interference and etc. Russia has overcome that by coming up with superior numbers. Against China, we don't even have that and yet China fields better fighters than what we currently have with the exceptions of the MKIs and Rafales but we don't have the numbers. How do we get the numbers? We need to develop our own fighters. IAF should have seen this coming a long time ago. THis forum saw this a long time ago. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that part out.

Well, Russia too will not have the numbers advantage for long against NATO. The numbers leftover from the days of USSR can only get them so far. They also need to look at making qualitatively superior fighters. With wrt Su-30 mki, IAF should have made Su-30 mki upgraded when they needed more than the initial projected 140 numbers to be made by HAL. Instead they sat on hope of MMRCA to bring in new AESA radar and other capabilities. If not for the FGFA ripoff, the idea was to switch Su-30 production in HAL Nashik to FGFA by 2025. This was the combined MoD, HAL and IAF idea then AMCA was just an afterthought. DRDO\ADA too very much on-board this idea. Again in 2010, nobody stopped ADA\DRDO from offering a stealthy AMCA or N-AMCA. But they were kinds fiddling their thumbs and trying to convince IAF about MCA knowing very well the future needed more capable fighters than their MCA and LCA. 'You build for the customer and not for your hobby research'. This almost never seems to dawn on DRDO.

Can you please explain HOW we are planning to convince Russia to give us full IP rights of the Su-30MKI? I would love to know. Just because they "need" money, is not a valid reason.

Sure it is a valid reason. The other reason is that they have their own program which is the Su-35MK which is different from the Su-30MKIs. No one else is buying the Su-30MKIs which have canards and thrust vectoring engines. Since the Su-30MKI is a dead end product, Russia has nothing to lose by selling the IP rights to it because no else aside from India will buy it. Russia gets to make more money off it and India gets to make more of these and keep the spares coming in keeping it as the backbone of the IAF strength, making it a win win situation.

If MoD pushes IAF to do the ORCA as the successor to the Rafale and promise IAF that it will buy at least 250 of these, I am sure IAF will get behind it. We are not going to get more Rafales until 8-9 years later. If we go for ORCA, we can get those planes in about 12-13 years because of the commonality with TEBDF and Tejas. So the cost will only be another 2-3 years in exchange for complete elimination of dependence on foreign fighters.

The reason HAL cannot manufacture a Su-30 airframe even with 100% TOT is the raw material. Even if you setup a factory for Raw material supplies to HAL, the input for Raw material still has to come from Russia. To certify a bunch of new suppliers will be a monumental undertaking which will shoot costs through the roof especially in a different country and environment. If the OEM does not take that effort on its own, its a fools errand especially with Indian babudom culture.

That being said. Nobody stopped HAL from substituting metallic airframe parts with composites like the chinese did with J-16. The composites design and manufacturing technology was there due to Tejas program. Russian sukoi bureau used the same DRDO composites technology for PAK FA. They could have built a couple of Su-30s from their company funds and offered it. But HAL was content doing chai-biscuit sessions with Dassault till 2014. Only after they lost Rafale Production, they have become serious about R&D and then came Tejas mk1a. So before 2016 nobody saw a need for more Tejas mk1a. Even parrikar ji said, if Rafale proved costly IAF will buy more Su-30 and not Tejas mk1a. But even that SU-30 buy was a negotiating tactic. With 36 Rafale already produced and more than a billion dollars spent to make custom changes. It makes sense to buy 114 MRFA as Rafale or atleast 36 immediately for the infrastructure already created.

The boat for more Su-30 mki has sailed with the last 12 order. I would have liked it too if it was 40 more like the previous times we ordered Su-30. But now there is Tejas mk1a and no need for new Su-30. Let us focus on upgrading the Su-30 and get on with AMCA.

..........THis forum saw this a long time ago. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that part out.

That compliment would be very flattering to a lot of people now. But only a handful saw this situation and put it out at that time. Even those did not predict this dire state of affairs where both MMRCA and FGFA failed. BRF was and still is pro Russian in character. BRF almost unanimously saw Russia winning the war in a couple of months time. People thought Su-35 and other platforms would guarantee air superiority over Ukraine. Nobody saw this conundrum where Russian aircraft industry might be pushed to irrelevance soon.

IAF had the right sense to diversify. But not the prudence to initiate redundancy programs. Result is that every deadline has been missed, every platform compromised and no result certain. DRDO does not fare any better on this metric. Yet we still remain hopeful and that is tragic.

Our AMCA too seems to be going this direction. Gods knows when practical sense will prevail over institutional interests.

[Rakesh]

Have you asked why it took so long? They didn't get the funds required to make it to the CDR stage and IAF did not want the Tejas so they did everything they could to sabotage it. So I lay the blame of the delay at the feet of the IAF.

What do you think is going to happen if the IAF does the same with ORCA? We are back at square one.

With 83 Tejas Mk1A + 97 more Tejas Mk1A, they are still holding the contest for 114 MRFA. I am not even going to bring in the Tejas Mk2 into the mix. Who is going to stop this purchase? The MRFA has been ongoing for 20+ years in different avatars (MMRCA, SEF and MRFA)...which Govt has or will put their foot down? You have to have a valid reason, for which the Govt has none.

If Air HQ starts giving technical reasons as to why the MRFA is relevant, the Govt response of "We-are-focusing-only-on-Atmanirbhar-Bharat" is not going to work. If India's enemy was only Pakistan, the Rafale might not be absolutely necessary in order to prevail. But the IAF is facing an enemy whose AD network in Tibet is vast, modern, effective and robust. The main concern is not even with their air fleet, but with their AD network. Entering Tibet is not going to be easy and I am sorry, but going in with the Su-30MKI will result in a very high attrition rate.

Apart from the Rafale, the IAF does not have an aircraft with the capability to effectively blunt the PLAGF. That is why Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa (retd) gave the reason for the utility of the Rafale. That is why Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria (retd) stated that the Rafale & Su-30MKI is potent. That is why Air Marshal SP Dharkar speaks highly of No 101 Falcons, which is presently under his command at the EAC. The technical argument for the Rafale (or any other LO or VLO aircraft) makes ample sense in modern air warfare.

The IAF has been at this for the past 9+ decades and they know what they are doing.

Again, I lay the blame at the feet of IAF who steadfastly refused to buy any more Tejas which was proven to be much better than the Mig-21s and Jaguars because they feared that they wouldn't get Rafales. They were so single-mindedly focused on the Rafales that they developed tunnel syndrome. They couldn't think anything else.

* Laying blame at the feet of the IAF (or whoever else) is water under the bridge. This is neither here or there and resolves NOTHING.

* Tejas Mk1 is indeed better than MiG-21, Jaguar and even the Mirage 2000H (non-upgraded variant). Tejas Mk1A will be better than even the Mirage 2000I (upgraded variant). But please look at the internal fuel + payload capacity of the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A and then compare it with the Rafale F3R(I). Please look at the sensors and avionics of the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A and then compare it with the Rafale F3R(I). It is an unfair comparison, because the Tejas was designed as a replacement for the MiG-21. The Mk2 variant - when it arrives - will address these issues.

* But you cannot expect the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A to do what the Rafale F3R(I) does. Does being focused on Atmanirbhar Bharat mean we have to throw logic, reason, common sense, technical requirements and threat perceptions out the window? Send the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A to do what the Rafale does and we will play right into the hands of the import lobby, who will be the first to claim to the ineffectiveness of the Tejas platform. Do we really want this? And if we send the Su-30MKI to do this, the situation will not be any different either. She will light up like a Christmas tree.

In the current Russia-Ukraine War, the Russian Air Force has lost nearly 70 fixed-wing aircraft. Source ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... aircraft_3

A majority of the nearly 70 aircraft lost are mainly the Su-24, Su-25, Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35. These losses are primarily because the Russian Air Force is not able to dominate the airspace in which they are operating in and this is against Ukraine. Now imagine what will happen to the Su-30MKI fleet over Tibet against the PLAGF (in the absence of SEAD/DEAD) and the PLAAF. The recent tragic loss of two Army officers and three ORs have brought about a pall of gloom and doom over everyone. Imagine the pandemonium that will happen when IAF pilots are needlessly killed trying to ingress into Tibet. Even worse would be, is if they eject over Tibet and are captured by the PLA, only to end up with a 9mm at the base of their skull. At that point, all this sanctimonius lecture of Atmanirbhar Bharat, Tejas, AMCA, etc will not matter.

The Chinese have no ethical or moral scruples. Please understand the enemy who will exploit every advantage they have. The goal is to reduce attrition & loss of life and not go in like Rambo, which is not real anyway.

Finally IAF accepted the truth. If only they had saw the light 13 years ago and make timely orders of the Tejas, we would not be in the position where our squadron numbers would be below.

Philosophy lectures are not going to win wars or prevail over your enemy. Accepting or not accepting truth is irrelevant to the present reality - the squadron shortage and more importantly, effective platforms to conduct - to quote Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa (retd) - "full spectrum of operations" and in which SEAD/DEAD missions come under that umbrella.

Why was the Mirage 2000 used in Balakot and not the Su-30MKI? The latter has a greater internal fuel capacity and a greater payload capability. But yet the choice of aircraft was the Mirage 2000. Each aircraft is best suited for a particular set of missions. The USAF will never send the F-22, to do what the A-10 does and the reverse is equally true. Will Air HQ send Jaguar to do interception of F-16, when the MiG-29UPG is there? Have you ever seen a MiG-23BN, a Jaguar IS/IB/IM or a MiG-27ML/UPG on the ORP (Operational Readiness Platform) to conduct air policing? Why did the IAF purchase the Mirage 2000 and the MiG-29 in the 1980s, when the MiG-23MF was first bought to counter the F-16?

There is an even better solution - than the Tejas Mk1A - to build up squadron strength. The Supermarine Spitfire, which became famous in World War II in the Battle of Britain. Also insanely cheaper than the Tejas Mk1A. We can build them in large numbers to address the squadron shortage. But will this work? Or why not some Hawker Hunters? Or Gnats? Or Maruts? All three are cheaper than Tejas Mk1A. Building up squadron strength is not akin to buying roasted peanuts from the roadside. There is a capability balance that determines what aircraft is required and how many are required. Air HQ is not pulling numbers or threats out of thin air.

Sorry I don't buy this. The one who holds the purse strings holds the power. Always have been. If you don't control the purse, you don't get to shape the narrative. Part of the problem lies with the seniority structure. MoD needs to appoint military commanders based on their abilities and willingness to transform the military into a lean fighting machine not based on their seniority. That is the only way to get things done.

If what you are claiming is true, then it should be very easy to cancel the MRFA contest. Do it. Let us know how that works out. The Govt controls the purse strings, but they cannot control the narrative...when it comes to acquisition of platforms and their capabilities. This is flawed & wishful thinking.

The last couple batches of military chiefs have all been appointed on merit and not seniority. The late General Bipin Rawat becoming Army Chief is a prime example. Even the current CDS was pulled out of retirement, because he had the merit to become CDS. The Govt could have very well appointed any one of the three service chiefs to succeed General Rawat, but went in a different direction. These military commanders will say all the right things (willingness, eagerness, forthrightness, quote Field Marshal Maneksaw, etc) to the Govt, but when push comes to shove...they will fight only for their service and not for some Govt policy.

In the unfortunate event that the opposition forms the next Govt and they abandon Atmanirbhar Bharat, who in the service is going to fight for self reliance? Willingness is tied to current Govt Policy. That is how it has worked in the past, this is how it currently works and this is how it will continue to work in the future.

As that it may be, there is a saying, quantity has its own quality.

This is such an age old and cliched statement, that it no value in modern air warfare. Even the present day PLAAF does not think like this.

We are genuinely heartbroken over the recent loss of 2 commissioned officers and 3 ORs. We felt equally heartbroken when the same incident occurred this past September. If we are sending unmanned drones into contested airspace, then no issue. But sending pilots into suicide missions - because quantity has its own quality - is just devoid of reality. In the name of Atmanirbhar Bharat, we are going to send valuable pilots into one way missions?

Take a look at the Russian-Ukraine conflict, despite overwhelming air superiority, Russia is not able to establish complete air dominance due to NATO interference and etc. Russia has overcome that by coming up with superior numbers. Against China, we don't even have that and yet China fields better fighters than what we currently have with the exceptions of the MKIs and Rafales but we don't have the numbers. How do we get the numbers? We need to develop our own fighters. IAF should have seen this coming a long time ago. THis forum saw this a long time ago. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that part out.

With our myopic thinking in relation to national security and the corresponding defence budget, you want India to do the following;

* Increase the Su-30MKI fleet from 272 airframes to 480 airframes
* At the same time, develop our own fighters and induct large numbers of them

If you go with proposals like this to the MoD, they will laugh you out of their office. The Navy experienced this walk of shame with INS Vishal i.e. the super duper, 65K ton, nuclear-powered and EMALS equipped aircraft carrier.

Sure it is a valid reason. The other reason is that they have their own program which is the Su-35MK which is different from the Su-30MKIs. No one else is buying the Su-30MKIs which have canards and thrust vectoring engines. Since the Su-30MKI is a dead end product, Russia has nothing to lose by selling the IP rights to it because no else aside from India will buy it. Russia gets to make more money off it and India gets to make more of these and keep the spares coming in keeping it as the backbone of the IAF strength, making it a win win situation.

Can we negotiate with Saturn Lyulka to get full IP rights over the AL-31FP turbofan? I would love to be in the room, when that question is asked

HAL claims to make the AL-31FP from the raw material stage. MoD states that 140+ Su-30MKIs have been built by HAL under a ToT (Transfer of Technology) scheme. If these two really did happen, then why is India talking to Russia over a mere 12 airframes?

The Russians are not going to give this to us. No country will give this to you. I gave you the example of how India will not do this for potential Tejas customers, but you believe and want this from a foreign country?

If MoD pushes IAF to do the ORCA as the successor to the Rafale and promise IAF that it will buy at least 250 of these, I am sure IAF will get behind it. We are not going to get more Rafales until 8-9 years later. If we go for ORCA, we can get those planes in about 12-13 years because of the commonality with TEBDF and Tejas. So the cost will only be another 2-3 years in exchange for complete elimination of dependence on foreign fighters.

No one in the MoD - especially Rajnath Singh or any of his successors - is going to push, coerce, force, beg, plead or even charm - the IAF to support the ORCA. There is only institution that can do that and that is the IAF itself. No one understands that better than the IAF.

You claimed that the IAF sabotaged the Tejas program and thus the reason for the delay in the Tejas Mk2 program. What do you think will happen in the ORCA program, if the IAF does not want it? Who is going to stop any potential sabotage?

[Cybaru]

I think benG, you already alluded to this earlier regarding why we buy raw materials from Ruskies. It may be required as per the contract, but a lot of it may also be due to processes and weights. Won't we need to redo the whole CG and FCS for MKI and recertify all of it without having the original code for it?

[Cybaru]

If MoD pushes IAF to do the ORCA as the successor to the Rafale and promise IAF that it will buy at least 250 of these, I am sure IAF will get behind it. We are not going to get more Rafales until 8-9 years later. If we go for ORCA, we can get those planes in about 12-13 years because of the commonality with TEBDF and Tejas. So the cost will only be another 2-3 years in exchange for complete elimination of dependence on foreign fighters.

It takes roughly 12-14 years for IAF, MOD, DF, and CCS to give okay to any homemade defence product. They have to either continuously update the design as they await clearance or meet new requirements as the world has changed. When will IAF get on board for ORCA? How about Def Ministry and the PM then?

ORCA would be a fool's errand with how our establishment behaves. If they are going to order 114 Rafales, the 2-ton MTOW increment with an exponentially high risk makes no sense. It will be roughly the same class of product. On this one, we eat the rafale costs, move on, and get an engine out of it. Focus on ensuring there are not Mk1 and Mk2 dimensionally different AMCA aircraft but just different engines in the two versions. This way it is truly a replacement for the MKI. Let's hope they get to 8-9 tons of internal fuel with MK1 and 30 ton MTOW.

ORCA clearance = 4-10 years.
Testing = 3-6 years - if IN TEDBF has been approved.
Production = 10 years for 120-150 aircraft.

Rafale = 2-3 years to signature
Production = 5-6 years from date + 12-15 a year

[bala]

Russia never does 100% TOT, they keep certain vital parts unto themselves. In the engine example (and this used to happen for Mig21) the compressors in the hot section were always shipped from Russia despite HAL claiming to make them. Why? They failed QA/QC. Similarly in the Su-30MKI certain parts are still shipped from Russia. This is the reality of tying up with vendor and making things. Even if you make parts from raw material provided by Russia, the machines and jigs involved are Russian and you are clueless as to what goes on in them.

Nobody stopped HAL from substituting metallic airframe parts with composites like the chinese did with J-16.

easier said than done. Changing weight requires further calculation of center of gravity for the craft and could affect the dynamics. Only the original developer can do this or you are in some trial and error mode. China can do this sort of stuff since they don't care whether the craft crashes.

Building a naval version of a craft is an entirely new design. Mao sir has told us about the N-LCA experience. Strengthening requires newer layouts and plumbing which is tedious and optimization takes a long time. So AMCA navy version is quite a different design especially when weapons are carried inside. Just imagine all kinds of challenges keeping that space free and clear. On top of that it should be stealth. Kya challenges yaar in one project?

DRDO/ADA can only iterate on designs, leaping to some new configuration requires a leap of faith without any background in the tradeoffs involved. Getting from 1 engine to 2 engine craft is a challenge and DRDO/ADA/HAL needs to go through a huge learning curve. At least HAL has 2 engine experience in their Helos. Supersonic regime is a whole new ball game. Hence TEDBF/ORCA was suggested. Only Indian Navy was willing to fund (without funds there is no design and proposing some paper design is a complete waste of time).

The collaboration efforts with Russia on Su-57/FGFA threw up so many ambiguities and none of them are DRDO/ADA issues. It is squarely on IAF/India/Russia since they could not come to terms like the Su-30MKI project. I am glad that India is pursuing AMCA but stealth tech is difficult to achieve and requires some time. These are not easy despite the US and Russia (partial) having done it. The Chinese version craft is not stealth.

[hgupta]

Have you asked why it took so long? They didn't get the funds required to make it to the CDR stage and IAF did not want the Tejas so they did everything they could to sabotage it. So I lay the blame of the delay at the feet of the IAF.

What do you think is going to happen if the IAF does the same with ORCA? We are back at square one.

With 83 Tejas Mk1A + 97 more Tejas Mk1A, they are still holding the contest for 114 MRFA. I am not even going to bring in the Tejas Mk2 into the mix. Who is going to stop this purchase? The MRFA has been ongoing for 20+ years in different avatars (MMRCA, SEF and MRFA)...which Govt has or will put their foot down? You have to have a valid reason, for which the Govt has none.

the reason why the Gov't hasn't put its foot down is due to the strong influence that the import lobby has imposed.

If Air HQ starts giving technical reasons as to why the MRFA is relevant, the Govt response of "We-are-focusing-only-on-Atmanirbhar-Bharat" is not going to work. If India's enemy was only Pakistan, the Rafale might not be absolutely necessary in order to prevail. But the IAF is facing an enemy whose AD network in Tibet is vast, modern, effective and robust. The main concern is not even with their air fleet, but with their AD network. Entering Tibet is not going to be easy and I am sorry, but going in with the Su-30MKI will result in a very high attrition rate.

Well there's also another reason why we should focus on Indian made fighters. They are sanctioned proof. No other nation will be able to hold India at its mercy when China starts attacking India. IAF planners need to realize this.

Apart from the Rafale, the IAF does not have an aircraft with the capability to effectively blunt the PLAGF. That is why Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa (retd) gave the reason for the utility of the Rafale. That is why Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria (retd) stated that the Rafale & Su-30MKI is potent. That is why Air Marshal SP Dharkar speaks highly of No 101 Falcons, which is presently under his command at the EAC. The technical argument for the Rafale (or any other LO or VLO aircraft) makes ample sense in modern air warfare.

And they should have recognize from the get go that Rafale is simply a very expensive plane and that IAF needs to have its homegrown solutions.

The IAF has been at this for the past 9+ decades and they know what they are doing.

Sorry I am not inclined to put them on a high pedestal and give them due deference. We have had given them enough due deference and what did it get us? Back to square one with little or next to none marginal improvement in our posture. Hard questions must be asked and their feet needs to be held to the frying pan. Enough with this deference to their knowledge. If they had been operating for 9+ decades and know what they are doing, then we wouldn't be in this situation where our squadron numbers are fulling or be still flying Mig-21 coffins when we had better solutions at hand and readily available with proper backing.

* Laying blame at the feet of the IAF (or whoever else) is water under the bridge. This is neither here or there and resolves NOTHING.

No but it does mean that we need to stop our deferential attitude towards the IAF and start asking them hard questions.

* Tejas Mk1 is indeed better than MiG-21, Jaguar and even the Mirage 2000H (non-upgraded variant). Tejas Mk1A will be better than even the Mirage 2000I (upgraded variant). But please look at the internal fuel + payload capacity of the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A and then compare it with the Rafale F3R(I). Please look at the sensors and avionics of the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A and then compare it with the Rafale F3R(I). It is an unfair comparison, because the Tejas was designed as a replacement for the MiG-21. The Mk2 variant - when it arrives - will address these issues.

Despite the shortcomings, a bird in hand is better than 2 birds in the bush and that was something IAF did not realize until now.

* But you cannot expect the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A to do what the Rafale F3R(I) does. Does being focused on Atmanirbhar Bharat mean we have to throw logic, reason, common sense, technical requirements and threat perceptions out the window? Send the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A to do what the Rafale does and we will play right into the hands of the import lobby, who will be the first to claim to the ineffectiveness of the Tejas platform. Do we really want this? And if we send the Su-30MKI to do this, the situation will not be any different either. She will light up like a Christmas tree.

Doesn't matter. Things don't happen in a vacuum. If IAF had put its backing in the Tejas program 13 years ago, there would have been a strong momentum to start developing a 2 engine platform that would have addressed the shortcomings of Tejas and provide another homegrown solution while at the same time keeping pace with our enemies. But instead, IAF chose to keep focusing on Rafale, chasing them only to get 36 Rafales. I do not think that we will get anything more than another additional 36 Rafales. 72 Rafales are not simply enough to withstand the onslaught of PLAAF which already has over 250 J-20s, 450 Su-27 derivatives, hundreds of J-10s, and not to mention their J-35 fighter, another 5th generation (supposedly) fighter.

In the current Russia-Ukraine War, the Russian Air Force has lost nearly 70 fixed-wing aircraft. Source ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_a ... aircraft_3

A majority of the nearly 70 aircraft lost are mainly the Su-24, Su-25, Su-27, Su-30 and Su-35. These losses are primarily because the Russian Air Force is not able to dominate the airspace in which they are operating in and this is against Ukraine. Now imagine what will happen to the Su-30MKI fleet over Tibet against the PLAGF (in the absence of SEAD/DEAD) and the PLAAF. The recent tragic loss of two Army officers and three ORs have brought about a pall of gloom and doom over everyone. Imagine the pandemonium that will happen when IAF pilots are needlessly killed trying to ingress into Tibet. Even worse would be, is if they eject over Tibet and are captured by the PLA, only to end up with a 9mm at the base of their skull. At that point, all this sanctimonius lecture of Atmanirbhar Bharat, Tejas, AMCA, etc will not matter.

And you think that 72 Rafales, let alone 96 Rafales( highly unlikely) is enough to avoid that? Sorry, that won't be enough. Since we won't stop PLAAF with 72 or 96 Rafales, obviously we need another solution. Since the Rafales would suck up money from the indigenous fighter program that can provide the necessary capabilities and numbers, the most logical solution would be to move away from the Rafales to those programs. You keep saying that GoI has no choice but to listen to the IAF. Well IAF has no choice but to listen to the GoI because for a decade IAF kept screaming we need more Rafales and guess what? GoI didn't budge.

The Chinese have no ethical or moral scruples. Please understand the enemy who will exploit every advantage they have. The goal is to reduce attrition & loss of life and not go in like Rambo, which is not real anyway.

I am under no illusions to how the Chinese would behave but 36 Rafales and waiting for the MFRA is not going to solve the problem. IAF should have seen this earlier.

Philosophy lectures are not going to win wars or prevail over your enemy. Accepting or not accepting truth is irrelevant to the present reality - the squadron shortage and more importantly, effective platforms to conduct - to quote Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa (retd) - "full spectrum of operations" and in which SEAD/DEAD missions come under that umbrella.

WHo says anything about philospophy? You are the one preaching it, not me. I am talking about the cold reality. The cold reality is that India was never gonna be able to afford 114 Rafales. When Modi only negotiated 36 Rafales (and he wanted to walk away but couldn't because of the penalty clauses which could have cost a bigger scandal so he chose the least cost way out), he did not order another 36 Rafales despite winning another mandate in 2019.

Why was the Mirage 2000 used in Balakot and not the Su-30MKI? The latter has a greater internal fuel capacity and a greater payload capability. But yet the choice of aircraft was the Mirage 2000. Each aircraft is best suited for a particular set of missions. The USAF will never send the F-22, to do what the A-10 does and the reverse is equally true. Will Air HQ send Jaguar to do interception of F-16, when the MiG-29UPG is there? Have you ever seen a MiG-23BN, a Jaguar IS/IB/IM or a MiG-27ML/UPG on the ORP (Operational Readiness Platform) to conduct air policing? Why did the IAF purchase the Mirage 2000 and the MiG-29 in the 1980s, when the MiG-23MF was first bought to counter the F-16?

SO you are saying that MKIs are too precious to waste and therefore cannot be used in combat? Besides the MKI had anothe role. It was air deterence. The 2000Hs were tasked with strike roles while the MKIs were tasked with air coverage and air deterence. Doesn't take away from their capabilities.

There is an even better solution - than the Tejas Mk1A - to build up squadron strength. The Supermarine Spitfire, which became famous in World War II in the Battle of Britain. Also insanely cheaper than the Tejas Mk1A. We can build them in large numbers to address the squadron shortage. But will this work? Or why not some Hawker Hunters? Or Gnats? Or Maruts? All three are cheaper than Tejas Mk1A. Building up squadron strength is not akin to buying roasted peanuts from the roadside. There is a capability balance that determines what aircraft is required and how many are required. Air HQ is not pulling numbers or threats out of thin air.

Now you are just setting up a strawman argument so I decline to debate you on this silly argument.

If what you are claiming is true, then it should be very easy to cancel the MRFA contest. Do it. Let us know how that works out. The Govt controls the purse strings, but they cannot control the narrative...when it comes to acquisition of platforms and their capabilities. This is flawed & wishful thinking.

So is thinking that the GoI would buy 114 Rafales later on and not doing anything about it when it doesn't pan out. GoI has been sending messages to the IAF that the Rafales were too costly and the IAF had to find another solution. Did they listen? No, they engaged in flawed & wishful thinking which led to the sorry state of reduced IAF fighter squadrons.

The last couple batches of military chiefs have all been appointed on merit and not seniority. The late General Bipin Rawat becoming Army Chief is a prime example. Even the current CDS was pulled out of retirement, because he had the merit to become CDS. The Govt could have very well appointed any one of the three service chiefs to succeed General Rawat, but went in a different direction. These military commanders will say all the right things (willingness, eagerness, forthrightness, quote Field Marshal Maneksaw, etc) to the Govt, but when push comes to shove...they will fight only for their service and not for some Govt policy.

You are talking about CDS which is a different beast. I am talking about the ranks of IAF, IA, and IN. They still have their pecking order based on seniority.

This is such an age old and cliched statement, that it no value in modern air warfare. Even the present day PLAAF does not think like this.

The Russian-Ukraine war is proving your statement wrong.

We are genuinely heartbroken over the recent loss of 2 commissioned officers and 3 ORs. We felt equally heartbroken when the same incident occurred this past September. If we are sending unmanned drones into contested airspace, then no issue. But sending pilots into suicide missions - because quantity has its own quality - is just devoid of reality. In the name of Atmanirbhar Bharat, we are going to send valuable pilots into one way missions?

So am i but we wil be even more heartbroken when PLAAF come rushing with superior numbers and superior planes. 36 or 72 or even 96 Rafales are not going to do it.

With our myopic thinking in relation to national security and the corresponding defence budget, you want India to do the following;

* Increase the Su-30MKI fleet from 272 airframes to 480 airframes
* At the same time, develop our own fighters and induct large numbers of them

If you go with proposals like this to the MoD, they will laugh you out of their office. The Navy experienced this walk of shame with INS Vishal i.e. the super duper, 65K ton, nuclear-powered and EMALS equipped aircraft carrier.

Well getting 114 Rafales is way even more laughable. How many times has IAF pled with MoD to get more Rafales? I was making a point in getting the economy of scale and leveraging an existing ecosystem and coming up with indigenous solutions to overcome the disadvantages and being creative. Take a look at PAF. Despite their limited resources, they have been creative in solving their own problems and addressing their weaknesses. Sure its not perfect but at least they got more bang for the buck than the IAF ever did.

Can we negotiate with Saturn Lyulka to get full IP rights over the AL-31FP turbofan? I would love to be in the room, when that question is asked

Laugh all you want, but the point is we haven't tried and we should have when Russia was desperate to make any kind of deal. Make them an offer that they cannot refuse.

HAL claims to make the AL-31FP from the raw material stage. MoD states that 140+ Su-30MKIs have been built by HAL under a ToT (Transfer of Technology) scheme. If these two really did happen, then why is India talking to Russia over a mere 12 airframes?

The Russians are not going to give this to us. No country will give this to you. I gave you the example of how India will not do this for potential Tejas customers, but you believe and want this from a foreign country?

Because they were not really to buy Tejas in large numbers. India bought MKIs in large numbers and we can buy more numbers. All we ask is that we be allowed to manufacture the spares in our own country so we can keep the planes flying in times of war and not worry about sanctions. As for talking to Russia over a mere 12 airframes is because IAF wants Rafales not MKIs and for that kind of money, India could upgrade its MKIs to address the shortcomings and be on a even keel with Rafales and get more numbers. You missed my point and instead resorted to derisive comments. Think about it. How do we solve the problem of facing PLAAF's overwhelming superior numbers, its vast domestic manufacturing base, etc.? That is what I am trying to do.

No one in the MoD - especially Rajnath Singh or any of his successors - is going to push, coerce, force, beg, plead or even charm - the IAF to support the ORCA. There is only institution that can do that and that is the IAF itself. No one understands that better than the IAF.

Sounds like you are making the classic mistake of deferring to them and putting them on a pedestal when you are not asking them hard questions and forcing them to explain why having an indigenous program is not preferential over a foreign fighter program.

You claimed that the IAF sabotaged the Tejas program and thus the reason for the delay in the Tejas Mk2 program. What do you think will happen in the ORCA program, if the IAF does not want it? Who is going to stop any potential sabotage?

Then it means we need to start cracking heads at IAF and stop being so deferential to them as you are being right now for the good of the country. Take a look at US and its air force. You should read some of the history on US Air Force and how military and civilian leaders would ask hard questions and not be deferential and made USAF explain itself why it wanted to do this and when they found some of those answers lacking, they demanded a change in the mindset and went about it. If they were this deferential as you are, USAF would not be where it is right now.

*Added later: I want to say one more thing. Modi got a lot of flak for the Rafale purchase even though the selection of Rafale was under the UPA regime. Do you honestly think that Modi and his political circle would want to sacrifice political capital to purchase a set number of Rafales that probably won't make a huge difference in the upcoming war with PLAAF? Especially when that money could be used to bolster its own indigenous fighter programs?

Modi is going all the way with Tejas because stupid RahaGa can't go after Modi on the Tejas program for because if he did, RahaGa would be laughed out of the room.

[Manish_P]

^ Not rona-dhona but a pooch.

Can upgraded Su30 MKI carry such a mission in future

Compare the RCS of the F-15 Silent Eagle, with the RCS of the F-22 or the F-35. You will have your answer
...

No. What I meant was the Su 30 MKI carrying on the mission on its own. Rather than a combo with a Mirage/Rafale

Say for eg a 8 bird attack. 2 Sus doing the bombing. 2 Sus doing jamming / EW. 4 Su providing top cover.

(With the bombs being Indian)

[LakshmanPST]

@HGupta ji...
I think the discussion originally started with "Why not more Su30s...?". It now deviated to something else...
----
Why not more Su30s...?
It was already answered above by Rakesh ji...
It is a 4th Gen Airframe with its own limitations like high RCS etc., which can not be used for some missions without inviting high attrition rate...
So, we need other more modern jets like Tejas and Rafale to take up these missions...

Using more numbers to offset lack of quality is not the correct approach... We can not lose pilots or assets when we have better solutions...
Assuming we can buy 2 Su30s with one Rafale and we send twice the no. of Su30s for the same misson as Rafales, the chances of Rafales coming back alive are still higher...

Your argument to cancel additional Rafale and use that money to upgrade Su30s will not work practically...
We can upgrade Su30s only to a certain level... But we can not change the RCS or upgrade engine...
Moreover, IAF already has 40% of its fleet made up of Su30s, (which have huge Opex and also require 2 pilots to operate...)

So, getting more Su30s is not going to happen... Russia is not going to give us IP either... Even if they give us, IAF is not going to buy more as they need balance in fleet composition...
----
Your subsequent points about cancelling Additional Rafale/MRFA and buying additional Tejas Mk1 or pushing for ORCA has some practical problems...

For SEAD/DEAD or Breaking-the-door operations, the best suited plane currently in IAF inventory is Rafale... Su30s are least suited for this role... I'm not sure to what level Tejas can be used for this role, but it definitely can not match Rafale for now...
AMCA will be better suited for this role when it is ready, but it will enter production only after 2035...

ORCA is only an unofficial proposal from HAL currently... Even if the project is taken up now, its timeline will coincide with AMCA's timeline...
So, it makes little sense for IAF to fund two projects coming up in same timeline for similar roles...
ORCA would have made sense, if it was proposed 10 years back, not now...

So, in near future, IAF needs more Rafale jets for optimally breaking the door... And that is why MRFA project is being pushed...
We may debate on whether they really need 114 jets or not, but one thing is clear that current numbers of 36 are not enough...

IAF may think of ORCA or some Heavy Combat Aircraft sometime in future when Su30s come up for retirement...
----
I do not want to answer other points about import lobby, IAF or HAL or ADA or some Babu's sabotaging/delaying things or lacking foresight...
Whatever happened has already happened, but for now I see a clear picture about future of IAF--->
11 Tejas Mk1/Mk1A squadrons (replacing Bisons and Jaguars)
2 Rafale
6 Tejas Mk2 squadrons (replacing Mirage 2000s and MIG29s)
That is 19 squadrons...

4-6 Additional Rafale/MRFA, which will take it to 23-25 squadrons...

Add 13 Su30 squadrons, which will take it to 36-38 squadrons...
A couple of additional Tejas Mk2 squadrons may also be ordered apart from 6 above...

Those earlier Su30s, whose retirement will start in 2040s, will be replaced by 7 AMCA squadrons...
For Su30 squadrons retiring after 2050, currently IAF has no plans... They may start funding some new program after 2030...
Future looks hopeful...

[ashthor]

ORCA -5gen will compliment AMCA 5 gen. Looking at how expensive the 5 gen (F22 & F35) is to operate and maintain
we will have to look into ORCA sooner or later. We should follow what the french with the Rafale from Naval to Air force.
It will be a low hanging fruit with most of the work done on the TEDBF.

[Rakesh]

the reason why the Gov't hasn't put its foot down is due to the strong influence that the import lobby has imposed.

Not true. I have said this before and I will say again ---> even with all the Tejas Mk1A orders + the Tejas Mk2 orders, the MRFA will still be needed to get the strength up to 42 squadrons. And this is not theory, but plain simple math. As simple as 1 + 1 = 2.

Do the math yourself. Count the numbers and you will see that it will not be sufficient. The MRFA will come.

Well there's also another reason why we should focus on Indian made fighters. They are sanctioned proof. No other nation will be able to hold India at its mercy when China starts attacking India. IAF planners need to realize this.

I am talking about the PLAGF and you are stating Indian made fighters are sanction proof. Just because a fighter is sanction proof, that does not make it immune to the Chinese AD network. Please talk apples to apples. And the Tejas is not sanction proof. If the GOTUS does not approve the sale of 97 F404 turbofans for the second tranche of Tejas Mk1As, what will we do?

And they should have recognize from the get go that Rafale is simply a very expensive plane and that IAF needs to have its homegrown solutions.

Once again, not discussing the issue...but circling around the bush and talking about Rafale being expensive. All LO and VLO aircraft are expensive. If you want the capability, you have to cough up the cash. Till the homegrown solution arrives (i.e. AMCA), you need a stop gap because the IAF is not delivering rose bouquets on Valentine's Day. And AMCA will not arrive till the 2040s, at least another two decades away. You want to send non-LO/VLO aircraft into contested airspace and expect them to come unscathed?

Sorry I am not inclined to put them on a high pedestal and give them due deference. We have had given them enough due deference and what did it get us? Back to square one with little or next to none marginal improvement in our posture. Hard questions must be asked and their feet needs to be held to the frying pan. Enough with this deference to their knowledge. If they had been operating for 9+ decades and know what they are doing, then we wouldn't be in this situation where our squadron numbers are fulling or be still flying Mig-21 coffins when we had better solutions at hand and readily available with proper backing.

What you and I think or even inclined to think is irrelevant to Air HQ. We can voice our opinions on a forum, but if you take this to Air HQ...they will throw this bravado talk - you are giving above - in the dustbin. Any questions asked - easy or hard - is done behind closed doors, to which we are never (and neither should we be) privy to. This is between the Govt of the day and Air HQ. What they decide, will happen.

You stating that the IAF's feet needs to be held to the frying pan and not giving deference might get an audience here. But this is as far as where this suggestion will go. I am not being dismissive, but just letting you know of the reality.

And when MRFA comes, they will not give two hoots about what any of us think on this forum. You can do morcha, hunger fast, hold placards (denouncing the IAF) in front of Vayu Bhavan and they still will not care.

No but it does mean that we need to stop our deferential attitude towards the IAF and start asking them hard questions.

Who is going to ask hard questions? The Opposition? The Govt? The PMO? The Raksha Mantri? When the Rafale scandal happened, one of main issues was why the Govt bought only 36 fighters and not 126 of them. Even the opposition - the ones who are supposed to ask hard questions - are doing the exact opposite. Opposition wants to import and the Govt of the day is also open to importing. You are going to stop importing?

Alternatively who are you planning to rope in, to ask hard questions to Air HQ? You want to write to your MP in Sansad Bhavan, to have him/her ask hard questions during Q&A session? Please also write to him/her about your proposal to add another 208 Su-30MKIs to the 272 airframes currently in service. You let us know how that works out.

Despite the shortcomings, a bird in hand is better than 2 birds in the bush and that was something IAF did not realize until now.

You are unable to see the picture or you just don't want to see the picture. But it does not matter, because the IAF is well aware of what the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A is capable of and what the Rafale is capable of. With statements like the above, your ideas are irrelevant.

Doesn't matter. Things don't happen in a vacuum. If IAF had put its backing in the Tejas program 13 years ago, there would have been a strong momentum to start developing a 2 engine platform that would have addressed the shortcomings of Tejas and provide another homegrown solution while at the same time keeping pace with our enemies. But instead, IAF chose to keep focusing on Rafale, chasing them only to get 36 Rafales. I do not think that we will get anything more than another additional 36 Rafales. 72 Rafales are not simply enough to withstand the onslaught of PLAAF which already has over 250 J-20s, 450 Su-27 derivatives, hundreds of J-10s, and not to mention their J-35 fighter, another 5th generation (supposedly) fighter.

IF, PERHAPS, MAYBE, MIGHT HAVE is not something to rely on. This is called crying over spilt milk, which is an exercise in futility. What should or may have happened 13 years ago is not going to do anything to address the issue now. The only thing that is real, is the present.

If the IAF only adds another 36 Rafales, it will still leave a capability gap and that gap will be plugged in with fighters that are LO or VLO. There is no homegrown solution of either type, so we will import even more. Once again, what you believe to be true or what you wish to see is not what is going to happen. What the Govt of the day - in partnership with the IAF - decides, will happen. Nothing more, nothing less.

And you think that 72 Rafales, let alone 96 Rafales( highly unlikely) is enough to avoid that? Sorry, that won't be enough. Since we won't stop PLAAF with 72 or 96 Rafales, obviously we need another solution.

It was Air Marshal Raghunath Nambiar (retd), former Chief of the Western Air Command, who said (video is there on YouTube) the following ---> "If we go in for Rafale again, we will need 90 more airframes. But if we go for another type, we will need 114 airframes due to a different maintenance schedule."

Air HQ is well aware of the Rafale's effectiveness over the threats they are up against, the number & types of missions that will have to be undertaken and the estimated attrition rate of the Rafale, when they break down the door. Reduce the MRFA number and you only keep the door open for even more imports i.e. MMRCA 1.0 was capped at 36 airframes, so the SE contest was opened for 114 fighters. That has now changed to 114 MRFA. If the MRFA purchase is capped again, you will have another MRFA contest and the circle will continue.

Since the Rafales would suck up money from the indigenous fighter program that can provide the necessary capabilities and numbers, the most logical solution would be to move away from the Rafales to those programs.

So Rafale sucking up money is bad and hara-kiri, but buying 208 more Su-30MKIs (in addition to full IP rights) is good. How many billions do you think the Russians will charge you for this? Assuming the Russians even agree to this hair-brained proposal, it will make the MRFA purchase look cute.

You keep saying that GoI has no choice but to listen to the IAF. Well IAF has no choice but to listen to the GoI because for a decade IAF kept screaming we need more Rafales and guess what? GoI didn't budge.

This theory of yours is not grounded in reality. In MMRCA 1.0, it was the UPA Govt that gave the green light to continue with the technical evaluation. On what basis do you think the IAF conducted these tests? You think foreign combat aircraft can just land nonchalantly at an air force station in India and the Govt will sit silent? In the SE contest and the now MRFA contest, it is the present Govt that gave the green light to go ahead. Even in the MRBF contest, the same thing happened. What are you even saying?

The IAF is talking about the technical capability of the MRFA. Who do you think wrote the technical RFP for the current 114 MRFA contest? Where the Govt gets involved is in the contract/price negotiations. But all the technical nitty-gritty is handled by the service for whom the RFP was generated. In MMRCA 1.0, it was the IAF that evaluated the multiple aircraft and not Manmohan Singh, AK Anthony or anyone else in the MoD. In the MRCBF, it was the Navy that evaluated the Rafale M and the F-18SH and not Narendra Modi, Rajnath Singh or anyone else in the MoD. But the Govt will get involved when the offer letter is evaluated.

Air HQ's new-founded admiration for the Tejas Mk1A - as some sort of magic pill - is not going to melt the MRFA contest away. The contest will continue, with the support of the Govt. The Govt has to pull the plug, but they will not. The contest might change in terms of structure, but the end result will remain ---> more induction of LO/VLO aircraft.

WHo says anything about philospophy? You are the one preaching it, not me. I am talking about the cold reality. The cold reality is that India was never gonna be able to afford 114 Rafales. When Modi only negotiated 36 Rafales (and he wanted to walk away but couldn't because of the penalty clauses which could have cost a bigger scandal so he chose the least cost way out), he did not order another 36 Rafales despite winning another mandate in 2019.

Please show me even one authoritative source (not some news article) where the PM wanted to walk away from a contract of 36 Rafales?

36 Rafales was not some random number that NaMo pulled out of thin air...after a yoga session. The Govt realised that discussions with Dassault was going nowhere (wrt to license production at HAL) and the Govt consulted with Air HQ on the impasse. It was Air HQ that advised the Govt to purchase 36 aircraft - as an immediate purchase - but to continue with the contest for a purchase of a larger tranche of aircraft. That gave birth to the SE contest and the now MRFA contest.

SO you are saying that MKIs are too precious to waste and therefore cannot be used in combat? Besides the MKI had another role. It was air deterence. The 2000Hs were tasked with strike roles while the MKIs were tasked with air coverage and air deterence. Doesn't take away from their capabilities.

The IAF had a large number of Su-30MKI airframes in 2019. Why use the Mirage 2000 at all? One Rambha fleet for strike and another Rambha fleet for air coverage & air deterrence. Doesn't take away from the Su-30MKI's capabilities. But that is not what happened!

And on the contrary, it was a pair of Su-30MKIs that held the fort on the next day. The IAF is not claiming that the MKIs is too precious at all.

So is thinking that the GoI would buy 114 Rafales later on and not doing anything about it when it doesn't pan out. GoI has been sending messages to the IAF that the Rafales were too costly and the IAF had to find another solution. Did they listen? No, they engaged in flawed & wishful thinking which led to the sorry state of reduced IAF fighter squadrons.

Air HQ is still engaging in MRFA with full support of the Govt. Who is going to tell the IAF to stop?

The present Air Chief talks about MRFA at every opportunity he gets. Are you aware of Rajnath Singh reprimanding him? The Air Chief spoke about MRFA, at the annual IAF press conference on the eve of IAF Day. And if he gets another opportunity, he will speak about it again.

And when the RFP is released, it will be with full approval of the Govt. Nothing happens without the Govt's approval.

You are talking about CDS which is a different beast. I am talking about the ranks of IAF, IA, and IN. They still have their pecking order based on seniority.

I spoke about how General Bipin Rawat became Army Chief superseding Lt Gens senior to him. You want to ignore that, fine go ahead.

The Russian-Ukraine war is proving your statement wrong.

The PLAAF is not the Ukrainian Air Force or the Russian Air Force.

So am i but we wil be even more heartbroken when PLAAF come rushing with superior numbers and superior planes. 36 or 72 or even 96 Rafales are not going to do it.

But 480 Su-30MKIs will definitely fit that bill!

Well getting 114 Rafales is way even more laughable. How many times has IAF pled with MoD to get more Rafales? I was making a point in getting the economy of scale and leveraging an existing ecosystem and coming up with indigenous solutions to overcome the disadvantages and being creative. Take a look at PAF. Despite their limited resources, they have been creative in solving their own problems and addressing their weaknesses. Sure its not perfect but at least they got more bang for the buck than the IAF ever did.

For that nth time, we have an assembly ecosystem which is never going to be converted into anything else. We are leveraging that system, but there are limitations to how much leverage we can engage with Russia on that. No amount of talking to Russia is going to change this.

Because they were not really to buy Tejas in large numbers. India bought MKIs in large numbers and we can buy more numbers. All we ask is that we be allowed to manufacture the spares in our own country so we can keep the planes flying in times of war and not worry about sanctions. As for talking to Russia over a mere 12 airframes is because IAF wants Rafales not MKIs and for that kind of money, India could upgrade its MKIs to address the shortcomings and be on a even keel with Rafales and get more numbers. You missed my point and instead resorted to derisive comments. Think about it. How do we solve the problem of facing PLAAF's overwhelming superior numbers, its vast domestic manufacturing base, etc.? That is what I am trying to do.

* How are you planning to convince Air HQ to buy 200+ more Su-30 airframes?

* How are you planning to force a plane onto a service, that does not want any more of them?

* How will you address the shortcomings of a non-LO platform like the Su-30MKI and make it on an even keel with the Rafale?

* If you believe that the Govt does not have funds for 114 MRFA, from which magic money tree are they going to find money for 208 additional Su-30MKI + full IP control of the platform?

Sounds like you are making the classic mistake of deferring to them and putting them on a pedestal when you are not asking them hard questions and forcing them to explain why having an indigenous program is not preferential over a foreign fighter program.

Who is qualified to ask Air HQ hard questions on the MRFA?

I asked you this before - who is there in the MoD? Or in the PMO? Or anyone in the Govt? Or in the opposition?

Where are you going to find these people? Those people better be technically qualified to answer questions that Air HQ will have.

Then it means we need to start cracking heads at IAF and stop being so deferential to them as you are being right now for the good of the country. Take a look at US and its air force. You should read some of the history on US Air Force and how military and civilian leaders would ask hard questions and not be deferential and made USAF explain itself why it wanted to do this and when they found some of those answers lacking, they demanded a change in the mindset and went about it. If they were this deferential as you are, USAF would not be where it is right now.

Whose head are you going to crack at Air HQ? You must have a valid reason to terminate someone in the military. The last one was Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat. You cannot just push people aside without a valid reason. India is not some autocracy or led by a despot. You terminate someone with no reason and the ripple effect could be detrimental. Purchasing MRFA is not a valid reason to terminate someone's employment.

Added later: I want to say one more thing. Modi got a lot of flak for the Rafale purchase even though the selection of Rafale was under the UPA regime. Do you honestly think that Modi and his political circle would want to sacrifice political capital to purchase a set number of Rafales that probably won't make a huge difference in the upcoming war with PLAAF? Especially when that money could be used to bolster its own indigenous fighter programs?

There are so many things wrong with the above, that I don't know where to start.

1) The Rafale was selected as L1 in the MMRCA 1.0 contest, under the UPA Govt. The Rafale was purchased by the NDA Govt, but under another contract. The Govt got flak because they purchased too little of them i.e. only 36 versus 126.

2) Both contracts are night and day on every measure - technical, financial, maintenance, spares, weaponry, etc.

3) When the first batch of Rafales arrived in India in July 2020, it was deployed as soon as possible. It was only *AFTER* the deployment of the Rafale, did the PLAAF bring in the J-20 to counter the aircraft.

4) Whichever party forms the next Govt - but especially the opposition - is going to order more MRFA. It might not come under the MRFA umbrella, but more foreign combat aircraft - at exorbitantly high prices - are going to come. The longer this contest is delayed, the only more expensive the acquisition is going to get.

[BenG]

What you and I think or even inclined to think is irrelevant to Air HQ. We can voice our opinions on a forum, but if you take this to Air HQ...they will throw this bravado talk you are giving above in the dustbin. Any questions asked - easy or hard - is done behind closed doors, to which we are never (and neither should we be) privy to. This is between the Govt of the day and Air HQ. What they decide, will happen.

You stating that the IAF's feet needs to be held to the frying pan and not giving deference might get an audience here. But this is as far as where this suggestion will go. I am not being dismissive, but just letting you know of the reality.

And when MRFA comes, they will not give two hoots about what any of us think on this forum. You can do morcha, hunger fast, hold placards (denouncing the IAF) in front of Vayu Bhavan and they still will not care.

Rakesh ji, hgupta has a point. You do have a deference to IAF and particularly DRDO without realizing it.

I am writing it not to point fingers. It is because I truly appreciate the effort that you put in to respond to commenters like me. If not for people such you, the discussion and forum will go stale. However, A total response throwing down that opinion in deference to authority is not helpful. But a wholesome response will do more more good for the community. Senior in my humble opinion could take the effort to respond with nuance rather than just dish out a response or laugh out the other party.

As for hgupta, nobody pointed out to him that Su-30 mki production was supposed to be succeeded by FGFA production which unfortunately did not happen. This was not the first successful collaboration with Russians on aircraft manufacture. we did the same thing with Mig-21, but did not achieve any numbers advantage. It only became a flying coffin by the end of its lifetime. So there are more downsides to doubling down on obsolete technology.

[Rakesh]

I am writing it not to point fingers. It is because I truly appreciate the effort that you put in to respond to commenters like me. If not for people such you, the discussion and forum will go stale. However, A total response throwing down that opinion in deference to authority is not helpful. But a wholesome response will do more more good for the community. Senior in my humble opinion could take the effort to respond with nuance rather than just dish out a response or laugh out the other party.

I am laughing because my "perceived" deference to the IAF, has no bearing even on the IAF

Do you think BRF can change anyone's opinion in the MoD, the PMO or even at Air HQ? I find it funny that anyone's response on this forum - mine, yours or anyone else's - is going to change the reality that exists in New Delhi.

We want to be molly coddled on BRF or do we want to accept the truth? You decide.

As for hgupta, nobody pointed out to him that Su-30 mki production was supposed to be succeeded by FGFA production which unfortunately did not happen. This was not the first successful collaboration with Russians on aircraft manufacture. we did the same thing with Mig-21, but did not achieve any numbers advantage. It only became a flying coffin by the end of its lifetime. So there are more downsides to doubling down on obsolete technology. As for more Tejas mk1a orders by IAF 10 years back, there was no mk1a 10 years back. There was mk2 with new engine whose design was not even finalized.

Why do you think the FGFA production did not succeed? It was the IAF who realized - very quickly - that the FGFA is not technologically relevant.

They abandoned the project and moved on to the AMCA program.

[BenG]

I am laughing because my "perceived" deference to the IAF, has no bearing even on the IAF

Do you think BRF can change anyone's opinion in the MoD, the PMO or even at Air HQ? I find it funny that anyone's response on this forum - mine, yours or anyone else's - is going to change the reality that exists in New Delhi.

We want to be molly coddled on BRF or do we want to accept the truth? You decide.

Well, BRF has been a trove of knowledge for a long time. Young people do read and form their opinions. Due to lack of quality defense journalism in India, BRF need to be held to a better standard than just parroting official discourse.

Why do you think the FGFA production did not succeed? It was the IAF who realized - very quickly - that the FGFA is not technologically relevant.

They abandoned the project and moved on to the AMCA program.

Did I question why they abandoned it? Did you explain why they abandoned this? What purpose does this response serve? I was simply pointing to the series of steps which lead to Su-30 mki being capped at 272. Quite frankly, pulling out of project is very easy and IAF along with Babudom is quite adept at it. Most small procurement projects are just for chai biscuit sessions in overseas countries at the expense of OEM.

[ramana]

How much of the above discussion is on the Su-30MKI?

[Rakesh]

How much of the above discussion is on the Su-30MKI?

Sorry Ramana-ji. I have moved portions of the back-and-forth reply between me and BenG to various other threads.

[Rakesh]

Well, BRF has been a trove of knowledge for a long time. Young people do read and form their opinions. Due to lack of quality defense journalism in India, BRF need to be held to a better standard than just parroting official discourse.

I am not against young or old people forming opinions. But is it wise to give young people the wrong or biased information, because one is predisposed to a certain line of thinking? Is it correct to teach young people to throw logic and common sense out of the window?

If a combat aircraft that is in service, is unable to execute a critical mission...then the service is wasting money by acquiring an aircraft that can? What are we really teaching young minds? If the balloon goes up before we get that capability from a locally developed aircraft, it is OK to send pilots into Kamikaze missions? Is this what we want to teach young minds? So self reliance is even more important than a pilot's life?

Bashing foreign maal, for the sake of bashing it, has become a time pass on BRF now.

If we *REALLY* want to make a change and inform young minds, then become like an Anantha Krishnan M (https://twitter.com/writetake) or like a Saurav Jha (https://twitter.com/SJha1618). Research and write articles. That would be better served for young minds.

Did I question why they abandoned it? Did you explain why they abandoned this? What purpose does this response serve? I was simply pointing to the series of steps which lead to Su-30 mki being capped at 272. Quite frankly, pulling out of project is very easy and IAF along with Babudom is quite adept at it. Most small procurement projects are just for chai biscuit sessions in overseas countries at the expense of OEM.

Did I not explain it in my post?

I will repeat again ---> It was the IAF who realized - very quickly - that the FGFA is not technologically relevant.

I will translate the above into simple English ----> The FGFA is useless.

Why should India waste money on projects, with zero return? What did we really learn from assembly of the MiG-21, MiG-27, Su-30MKI, etc? Assembling FGFA would have been the same story. I am glad the IAF saw boondoggle that the FGFA was and walked away from it.

India has learnt far more about combat aircraft, manufacturing and production in the Tejas program, than we ever did with the US $250 million that we wasted on the FGFA program. Good Riddance!

[Roop]

The IAF had a large number of Su-30MKI airframes in 2019. Why use the Mirage 2000 at all?

This is an important question, and the answer (IMO) is pretty straightforward: the choice of air platform was dictated by the choice of weapon for the mission. IAF had decided to use Spice / Crsytal Maze on the target, and the Mirage 2000 was the only aircraft in Indian inventory that was mated/integrated with that weapon. It was as simple as that.

On some other mission, for some other target, had the use of Brahmos been necessary, the chosen air platform would have been Sukhoi Su30-MKI. Again, as simple as that. No other selection was / is possible.

[Roop]

Sorry I am not inclined to put them on a high pedestal and give them due deference.

You are "not inclined to put them (IAF) on a high pedestal and give them due deference" (okay, your choice) but seem quite eager to put PLAAF on a high pedestal and give them lots of deference. There is a ridiculous air of hero-worship about your posts re. the PLAAF. What is the basis for this hero worship? It can't be their actual track record in war, because they have none. So what is it?

72 Rafales are not simply enough to withstand the onslaught of PLAAF which already has over 250 J-20s, 450 Su-27 derivatives, hundreds of J-10s, and not to mention their J-35 fighter, another 5th generation (supposedly) fighter.

More shivering-dhoti China-worshipping magical thinking here. Just tell me two things:

• What makes you think that J-35 is a VLO aircraft when several IAF air marshals have said it is not? Is it because China has made the claim? Because it has the number "35" in its name? If not, what?
• If the PLAAF are so convinced (as you seem to be) that they can smash the cr@p out of India in any future war, why haven't they started a war yet? What is holding them back?

[hgupta]

Sorry I am not inclined to put them on a high pedestal and give them due deference.

You are "not inclined to put them (IAF) on a high pedestal and give them due deference" (okay, your choice) but seem quite eager to put PLAAF on a high pedestal and give them lots of deference. There is a ridiculous air of hero-worship about your posts re. the PLAAF. What is the basis for this hero worship? It can't be their actual track record in war, because they have none. So what is it?

Wow. you actually came up with that after reading my post?? Talk about being way off base. Just look at the numbers of planes that PLAAF is incorporating into service. If you think that my acknowledgment of their numbers somehow resort to hero-worship and calling out the deficiencies of IAF's strategic thinking translate into hero-worship, then I am afraid that I can't say much for your analytical and logical reasoning skills.

72 Rafales are not simply enough to withstand the onslaught of PLAAF which already has over 250 J-20s, 450 Su-27 derivatives, hundreds of J-10s, and not to mention their J-35 fighter, another 5th generation (supposedly) fighter.

More shivering-dhoti China-worshipping magical thinking here. Just tell me two things:

• What makes you think that J-35 is a VLO aircraft when several IAF air marshals have said it is not? Is it because China has made the claim? Because it has the number "35" in its name? If not, what?
• If the PLAAF are so convinced (as you seem to be) that they can smash the cr@p out of India in any future war, why haven't they started a war yet? What is holding them back?

Talk about bravado and being lulled into a false sense of security. Who do you exactly remind me of? Oh yes those IA yes men generals that Nehru and his crony DM picked because they couldn't withstand to hear the truth. If you are not alarmed or pertrubed by the military buildup in Tibet by China and all those infrastructure buildup, and that we are engaged in dhoti-shivering and we have nothing to worry about, I think a career in astrology is the perfect fit for you.

It is on record that IAF is losing squadron strength and it will take at least 10 years to restore to 42 squadrons. It is on record that PLAAF are inducting hundreds of modern planes into its fighter squadrons. Whether they be VLO or not, the point remains those fighters are more advanced than what they had before. Assumption is the mother of all ******. We cannot afford to make assumptions that the PLAAF' fighters are not that advanced and we do not have to worry about. As a defense planner, you must plan for the worst and hope for the best, leaving nothing to chance. So this is what I am doing. I am planning for the worst and hoping for the best but leaving nothing to chance. So I cannot make the assumption that China do not have 5th generation fighters or 4.5 generation fighters. Check the orbat of PLAAF. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27 ... _inventory.

You will find that PLAAF has over 500 planes of the Su-27 variety. Are you going to make the assumption that those 500 planes are not good planes? Not only that PLAAF has over 210 J-20 which they have classified as stealth fighters and even some US planners acknowledge that they have stealthy features and cannot ignore those features even though their own planes remain supreme. See this post: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/c ... neral-says.

[The J-20 is] not something to lose a lot of sleep over, but I'm gonna pay attention to it."

And they have the J-10C planes which war planners all over the world acknowledge is nearly the equivalent of F-16 plane which is a 4th generation fighters. 1300 planes of PLAAF are classified as 4th generation or higher. Half of IAF's inventory (which is around less than 700) are currently classified as 3rd generation and the rest are 4th generation or higher. Do you not see the number asymmetry there? Or do you prefer to think that every thing is fine and dandy?

Recognizing this number imbalance and making plans to address this is called being prudent. So how does being prudent and planning for the worst exactly translate into being hero-worship of PLAAF and engaging in dhoti shivering? It sounds like you are engaged in wordplay and creating your narrative based on flimsy tenets because you do not like what I am saying and you seek to denigrate my post by accusing me of engaging in hero-worship and dhoti-shivering when I have done nothing of the sort but only asking hard questions and not being too deferential.

So please come up with a coherent argument next time.

[hgupta]

Not true. I have said this before and I will say again ---> even with all the Tejas Mk1A orders + the Tejas Mk2 orders, the MRFA will still be needed to get the strength up to 42 squadrons. And this is not theory, but plain simple math. As simple as 1 + 1 = 2.

And why does this have to be MRFA? This squadron deficiency was long recognized over 10 years ago and we are nowhere in selecting a plan for the MRFA but continuing to engage in chai biskoot. What does that tell you? MRFA is simply too expensive and will not give you the numbers you are looking for.

Do the math yourself. Count the numbers and you will see that it will not be sufficient. The MRFA will come.

I think you are going in circles trying to justify the MRFA when you say that we need numbers. If we need numbers, then there is a simple fix, Get more LCA Mk1 and MKIs for we have an existing infrastructure.

Tell me what is exactly so special about the Rafales that MKIs can’t do the job. If you tell me that the MKIs have a bigger RCS than the Rafales, so what? Rafale is not exactly stealthy. You can still detect it over 100 miles away. What difference does it make when you can still see the Rafale 100 miles away even though its RCS is smaller than the MKIs? The MKIs are currently undergoing a super upgrade that would address many of its deficiencies. Is it not unreasonable to think that after the upgrade, the MKIs are just as potent as the Rafales?

I am talking about the PLAGF and you are stating Indian made fighters are sanction proof. Just because a fighter is sanction proof, that does not make it immune to the Chinese AD network. Please talk apples to apples. And the Tejas is not sanction proof. If the GOTUS does not approve the sale of 97 F404 turbofans for the second tranche of Tejas Mk1As, what will we do?

Ok so by your logic, going for 100% foreign made is a lot better than going for indigenous fighter programs that we can work on making 100% sanction proof over time? I mean it won’t happen overnight but we will get there. IF we go for 100% foreign made, we will never reach the goal of being self sufficient. We will always be perpetually be dependent on foreign tech. You have to start somewhere.

Once again, not discussing the issue...but circling around the bush and talking about Rafale being expensive. All LO and VLO aircraft are expensive. If you want the capability, you have to cough up the cash. Till the homegrown solution arrives (i.e. AMCA), you need a stop gap because the IAF is not delivering rose bouquets on Valentine's Day. And AMCA will not arrive till the 2040s, at least another two decades away. You want to send non-LO/VLO aircraft into contested airspace and expect them to come unscathed?

So? We have sent in non-LO/VLO aircraft into combat before and incurred losses. This is war after all. We cannot be too squeamish about casualties. You need to accept a bloody nose to win a fight. Sure having stealthy planes would reduce casualties but it doesn’t mean it is the only way to fight. By the way, it is by no means that Rafale is a VLO plane. That is a marketing gimmick/ploy. For starters, it has canards. That is a dead giveaway. So how does Rafale perform better than the upgraded MKIs?

What you and I think or even inclined to think is irrelevant to Air HQ. We can voice our opinions on a forum, but if you take this to Air HQ...they will throw this bravado talk - you are giving above - in the dustbin. Any questions asked - easy or hard - is done behind closed doors, to which we are never (and neither should we be) privy to. This is between the Govt of the day and Air HQ. What they decide, will happen. You stating that the IAF's feet needs to be held to the frying pan and not giving deference might get an audience here. But this is as far as where this suggestion will go. I am not being dismissive, but just letting you know of the reality.

But we are the taxpayers. We can demand our Parliamentarians to ask the hard questions and the IAF being servient to the GOI has to answer those questions. Besides, Manihor Parrikar wasn’t exactly deferential when he rammed the LCA Tejas down the throats of the IAF brass. Now the IAF brass are singing a different tune. If Parrikar had gone by your thinking, India would not be where it is now, having a viable LCA program and ordering the Tejas in large numbers.

And when MRFA comes, they will not give two hoots about what any of us think on this forum. You can do morcha, hunger fast, hold placards (denouncing the IAF) in front of Vayu Bhavan and they still will not care.

And Parrikar didn’t give two hoot about what the IAF brass thought. He made the IAF accepted the Tejas program. He didn’t go by your way of thinking.

Who is going to ask hard questions? The Opposition? The Govt? The PMO? The Raksha Mantri? When the Rafale scandal happened, one of main issues was why the Govt bought only 36 fighters and not 126 of them. Even the opposition - the ones who are supposed to ask hard questions - are doing the exact opposite. Opposition wants to import and the Govt of the day is also open to importing. You are going to stop importing?

So you want to throw in the towel and say it is just too hard?

Alternatively who are you planning to rope in, to ask hard questions to Air HQ? You want to write to your MP in Sansad Bhavan, to have him/her ask hard questions during Q&A session? Please also write to him/her about your proposal to add another 208 Su-30MKIs to the 272 airframes currently in service. You let us know how that works out.

Why not? That is how things got done in the US. Somebody had the temerity to raise hard questions and stuck his or her head out. If you are not going to challenge the current thinking, nothing will change. That is the result of your attitude and thinking.

You are unable to see the picture or you just don't want to see the picture. But it does not matter, because the IAF is well aware of what the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A is capable of and what the Rafale is capable of. With statements like the above, your ideas are irrelevant.

Continue to be dismissive of what I think, that is entirely up to you but you know what? Your statements make me dismissive of what you state in your prior posts because you are simply too deferential to what the IAF brass wants and not asking the hard questions. You are just inclined to let things go as things are.

I am seeing the bigger picture in strategic terms. I am thinking about winning wars, not battles. You are thinking about winning battles, not war. It has been proven in the past that a nation with superior production capability and superior logistics win the war almost every single time. Whatever the deficiencies Tejas have and whatever strengths Rafales have, the point remain is that we are not producing our own fighter planes in large numbers because we are starved of funds and resources that went into foreign fighter planes that we cannot procure in large numbers to offset the numerical superiority that our enemies have over us. Besides, it is not just the PLAAF we have to worry about but the PAF. There is a serious possibility that India may fight a 2 front war. IAF does not have the numbers to fight a 2 front war. That is the bigger picture I am looking at which you are not looking at. We as a nation must come up with a way to produce 4th/5th generation fighters in large number in order to withstand any onslaught by our enemy.

IF, PERHAPS, MAYBE, MIGHT HAVE is not something to rely on. This is called crying over spilt milk, which is an exercise in futility. What should or may have happened 13 years ago is not going to do anything to address the issue now. The only thing that is real, is the present.

And that is the attitude that keeps us in trouble all the time because we have no strategic foresight. I do not see the IAF brass displaying strategic foresight but only tactical foresight when it continues to insist on getting Rafales which India cannot afford in large numbers.

If the IAF only adds another 36 Rafales, it will still leave a capability gap and that gap will be plugged in with fighters that are LO or VLO. There is no homegrown solution of either type, so we will import even more. Once again, what you believe to be true or what you wish to see is not what is going to happen. What the Govt of the day - in partnership with the IAF - decides, will happen. Nothing more, nothing less.

Again, not recognizing the situation and not doing something about it but continuing to remain deferential to the IAF brass who have not shown any notion of how to address this problem.

It was Air Marshal Raghunath Nambiar (retd), former Chief of the Western Air Command, who said (video is there on YouTube) the following ---> "If we go in for Rafale again, we will need 90 more airframes. But if we go for another type, we will need 114 airframes due to a different maintenance schedule."

Air HQ is well aware of the Rafale's effectiveness over the threats they are up against, the number & types of missions that will have to be undertaken and the estimated attrition rate of the Rafale, when they break down the door. Reduce the MRFA number and you only keep the door open for even more imports i.e. MMRCA 1.0 was capped at 36 airframes, so the SE contest was opened for 114 fighters. That has now changed to 114 MRFA. If the MRFA purchase is capped again, you will have another MRFA contest and the circle will continue.

And the circus continues. IAF brass has been saying this for over 10 years. Are we exactly close to 114 airframes? No. GoI continues its chai biskoot and dragging its feet. What does that tell you? It is not affordable!!!! You keep saying that I would be laughed out of the room for proposing a solution for the MKIs upgrades. Well, GoI are laughing the IAF brass out of the room just as it did with the IN when IN proposed the nuclear 65k carrier version with EMALs catapult.

So Rafale sucking up money is bad and hara-kiri, but buying 208 more Su-30MKIs (in addition to full IP rights) is good. How many billions do you think the Russians will charge you for this? Assuming the Russians even agree to this hair-brained proposal, it will make the MRFA purchase look cute.

Getting 208 more upgraded MKIs and upgrading our existing MKIs would not only bridge the technological gap but solve the falling squadron problems. 480 MKIs means 24 squadrons. We are getting 12 squadrons of Tejas Mk1A and 6 squadrons Tejas Mk2 and that makes 18 squadrons. Viola, we reached 42 squadrons. Not only that, we have simplified the supply chain because we are only supporting fewer types of planes and introducing economy of scale, instead of supporting over 7 different types of planes.

This theory of yours is not grounded in reality. In MMRCA 1.0, it was the UPA Govt that gave the green light to continue with the technical evaluation. On what basis do you think the IAF conducted these tests? You think foreign combat aircraft can just land nonchalantly at an air force station in India and the Govt will sit silent? In the SE contest and the now MRFA contest, it is the present Govt that gave the green light to go ahead. Even in the MRBF contest, the same thing happened. What are you even saying?

The IAF is talking about the technical capability of the MRFA. Who do you think wrote the technical RFP for the current 114 MRFA contest? Where the Govt gets involved is in the contract/price negotiations. But all the technical nitty-gritty is handled by the service for whom the RFP was generated. In MMRCA 1.0, it was the IAF that evaluated the multiple aircraft and not Manmohan Singh, AK Anthony or anyone else in the MoD. In the MRCBF, it was the Navy that evaluated the Rafale M and the F-18SH and not Narendra Modi, Rajnath Singh or anyone else in the MoD. But the Govt will get involved when the offer letter is evaluated.

I think you place way too much importance on how the IAF evaluated the MRFA and etc. That doesn’t solve the strategic issue, which is the overwhelming production advantage by China. We need to meet that issue by having our own production base.

Air HQ's new-founded admiration for the Tejas Mk1A - as some sort of magic pill - is not going to melt the MRFA contest away. The contest will continue, with the support of the Govt. The Govt has to pull the plug, but they will not. The contest might change in terms of structure, but the end result will remain ---> more induction of LO/VLO aircraft.

Well GoI’s continuing chai biskoot says otherwise.

Please show me even one authoritative source (not some news article) where the PM wanted to walk away from a contract of 36 Rafales?

Modi wanted to walk away from the entire program and concentrate on indigenous programs but Modi couldn’t because of the penalty clauses. Why would he only buy 36 Rafales? He is not stupid enough only go for 36 Rafales. He did it because it was the least expensive option. Walking away with nothing and paying a penalty is what happened to the Aussies when they walked away from the French sub program. See here: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 892688.cms

India was not only in danger of not getting the Rafale, but not getting anything else either because nobody would be able to actually scrap the deal without incurring penalties. It would have been a festering sore that would have impacted India-France relations.

36 Rafales was not some random number that NaMo pulled out of thin air...after a yoga session. The Govt realised that discussions with Dassault was going nowhere (wrt to license production at HAL) and the Govt consulted with Air HQ on the impasse. It was Air HQ that advised the Govt to purchase 36 aircraft - as an immediate purchase - but to continue with the contest for a purchase of a larger tranche of aircraft. That gave birth to the SE contest and the now MRFA contest.

See my post above.

The IAF had a large number of Su-30MKI airframes in 2019. Why use the Mirage 2000 at all? One Rambha fleet for strike and another Rambha fleet for air coverage & air deterrence. Doesn't take away from the Su-30MKI's capabilities. But that is not what happened!

And on the contrary, it was a pair of Su-30MKIs that held the fort on the next day. The IAF is not claiming that the MKIs is too precious at all.

So MKIs can do the job after all and after the upgrades it can do the job of the Rafales.

Air HQ is still engaging in MRFA with full support of the Govt. Who is going to tell the IAF to stop?

The present Air Chief talks about MRFA at every opportunity he gets. Are you aware of Rajnath Singh reprimanding him? The Air Chief spoke about MRFA, at the annual IAF press conference on the eve of IAF Day. And if he gets another opportunity, he will speak about it again.

And yet GoI is continuing its chai biskoot activities.

And when the RFP is released, it will be with full approval of the Govt. Nothing happens without the Govt's approval.

Please pass the tea. It is fantastic.

I spoke about how General Bipin Rawat became Army Chief superseding Lt Gens senior to him. You want to ignore that, fine go ahead.

And you completely missed the point and ignored what I said. Rawat cannot exactly overrule IAF on every matter or micromanage IAF to the point where it will do exactly what he says. And besides Rawat doesn’t have that kind of power. He was only given the power to institute changes in strategic thinking and doctrinal changes. Sure he had a lot of influence but by no means he could overrule IAF brass on IAF doctrine, fighting tactics, and weapon procurements. Only IAF brass can do that and to change the IAF brass, you need to be able to replace commanders and leaders at multiple levels based on merit not seniority.

The PLAAF is not the Ukrainian Air Force or the Russian Air Force.

No it is not but it is a good learning experience and lessons learned there can be applied to the eastern theater as well. USAF is learning from that conflict as well and so are NATO countries.

But 480 Su-30MKIs will definitely fit that bill!

For starters, it nearly matches the number of Su-27 derivatives PLAAF have. And with our Tejas numbers, that will match the other 4th generation fighters they have to a lesser degree. We still have to counter the 5th generation fighter (so called 5th generation) they have. For that, we can turn to the ORCA/TEDBF and AMCA.

For that nth time, we have an assembly ecosystem which is never going to be converted into anything else. We are leveraging that system, but there are limitations to how much leverage we can engage with Russia on that. No amount of talking to Russia is going to change this.

I disagree with you on this point. This was a missed opportunity.

* How are you planning to convince Air HQ to buy 200+ more Su-30 airframes?

* How are you planning to force a plane onto a service, that does not want any more of them?

* How will you address the shortcomings of a non-LO platform like the Su-30MKI and make it on an even keel with the Rafale?

* If you believe that the Govt does not have funds for 114 MRFA, from which magic money tree are they going to find money for 208 additional Su-30MKI + full IP control of the platform?

Because procuring 208 upgraded MKIs is a lot cheaper than buying 114 MRFAs. You can persuade the IAF by firing some brass and promoting leaders that are willing to make the necessary changes.

Rafale is by no means stealthy. VLO is just a marketing ploy.

Who is qualified to ask Air HQ hard questions on the MRFA?

I asked you this before - who is there in the MoD? Or in the PMO? Or anyone in the Govt? Or in the opposition?


Where are you going to find these people? Those people better be technically qualified to answer questions that Air HQ will have.

So your answer is to do nothing and go with the status quo? Not stick your head out and dare to ask hard questions wherever and whenever that may be? Just keep smiling and saying that he is the expert and we must trust what he says and keep nodding?

Whose head are you going to crack at Air HQ? You must have a valid reason to terminate someone in the military. The last one was Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat. You cannot just push people aside without a valid reason. India is not some autocracy or led by a despot. You terminate someone with no reason and the ripple effect could be detrimental. Purchasing MRFA is not a valid reason to terminate someone's employment.

You would be surprised on how the Pentagon and US government control the USAF. They cracked heads when needed be to get their message across.

There are so many things wrong with the above, that I don't know where to start.

1) The Rafale was selected as L1 in the MMRCA 1.0 contest, under the UPA Govt. The Rafale was purchased by the NDA Govt, but under another contract. The Govt got flak because they purchased too little of them i.e. only 36 versus 126.

My point was that Modi could not escape the flak. It was a no win situation for him. Please refer to my above post about the fact that he couldn’t walk away without incurring heavy penalties. So he chose the least expensive way out and still got flak.

2) Both contracts are night and day on every measure - technical, financial, maintenance, spares, weaponry, etc.

3) When the first batch of Rafales arrived in India in July 2020, it was deployed as soon as possible. It was only *AFTER* the deployment of the Rafale, did the PLAAF bring in the J-20 to counter the aircraft.

Chalk it up to coincidental scheduling of deployment. They start mass production of the J-20s when the conflict broke out and they had enough planes to send them into Tibet. Whether it was a response to Rafale or not, it didn’t matter. PLAAF had always planned to station J-20s in Tibet.

4) Whichever party forms the next Govt - but especially the opposition - is going to order more MRFA. It might not come under the MRFA umbrella, but more foreign combat aircraft - at exorbitantly high prices - are going to come. The longer this contest is delayed, the only more expensive the acquisition is going to get.

Hence the continuing chai biskoot going on.

[Pratyush]

HGupta,

The raw numbers of the the PLAAF are not really relevant.

What is relevant would be the ability of the PLAAF to sustain that level of force in the Tibetan theatre of operations.

The professional assessment is that the PLAAF is incapable of sustainable deployment of force over the Tibetan theatre of operations.

Therefore, the IAF is fairly confident of handling the PLAAF.

Armchair analysis can demand XYZ numbers. But the professional opinion matters more than ours.

[LakshmanPST]

Because procuring 208 upgraded MKIs is a lot cheaper than buying 114 MRFAs.

I disagree with this, as this statement has no basis whatsoever...
The difference between non-upgraded Su30 and Rafale, in worst case scenario will be around 1.3-1.4 times, not more... Upgraded Su30s will cost more...

For 114 Rafales, you can get around 150 non-upgraded Su30s only...

[AkshaySG]

One of the points not mentioned in any of the discussions above is the fact that Su-30 MKI is a two seater fighter and IAF simply doesn't have the number of qualified pilots/WSOs to significantly increase Su-30 figures. Of course additional recruitment isn't impossible but still something to consider.

Also it's not just about the amount of fighters but the mix of them as well, You can't fill your entire squadron strength with heavy expensive to operate Air Superiority Fighters and similarly you can't just have light fighters either, There needs to be a mix of Light, Medium and Heavy birds who each have their strengths and weaknesses.

I think what's really going to happen is in between of the full MRFA and fully indigenous options being explained above.

We will get 36 more Rafales (along with 24 odd for IN), That makes the total number close to 100 which is enough to make good use of the base, simulator, ISE etc etc costs we invested in

The rest of the numbers will be made up by Mk1A and Mk2. As IAF starts using Mk1 and Mk2 more and more they will better understand the benefits of a home grown fighter and the freedom to tweak/upgrade as you wish. We may be looking at 200+ MK1/A and another 100 or so MK2s

The Su-30 will go through an upgrade, It will be expensive and the Russians will try to bleed us dry but we will go through with it because Su-30s will remain critical to our operations till the 2040s and beyond. The main focus will shift to AMCA and getting proper VLO/5th Gen tech.

[Manish_P]

One of the points not mentioned in any of the discussions above is the fact that Su-30 MKI is a two seater fighter and IAF simply doesn't have the number of qualified pilots/WSOs to significantly increase Su-30 figures. Of course additional recruitment isn't impossible but still something to consider...

Interesting point Akshay sir. With rapid progress in automation (including AI) wouldn't you say that there would be lesser need for 2 man machines in the future. The F35, Rafale,Typhoon etc give an indication towards it.

The US is even thinking of optionally/remotely manned next-gen fighters/fighter bombers.

With a large enough talent pool in india, this would be something for us to keep in mind and plan for.

Are the russians looking to upgrade the Su-30, Su-57 along these lines? A joint project for this would be very useful to both countries..

[hgupta]

HGupta,

The raw numbers of the the PLAAF are not really relevant.

What is relevant would be the ability of the PLAAF to sustain that level of force in the Tibetan theatre of operations.

The professional assessment is that the PLAAF is incapable of sustainable deployment of force over the Tibetan theatre of operations.

Therefore, the IAF is fairly confident of handling the PLAAF.

Armchair analysis can demand XYZ numbers. But the professional opinion matters more than ours.

If IAF's inventory was not below the minimum sanctioned strength, you would have a point but as it is now, we are well below the minimal number to guard our skies and borders. As for PLAAF incapable of sustaining deployment, are you not reading reports of PLAAF building more than 20 airbases in Tibet and building infrastructure to support those bases? And they are not stopping there. What you say may hold true today but will not hold true tomorrow. Can we afford to be that passive in our defense doctrinal thinking?

[hgupta]

Because procuring 208 upgraded MKIs is a lot cheaper than buying 114 MRFAs.

I disagree with this, as this statement has no basis whatsoever...
The difference between non-upgraded Su30 and Rafale, in worst case scenario will be around 1.3-1.4 times, not more... Upgraded Su30s will cost more...

For 114 Rafales, you can get around 150 non-upgraded Su30s only...

Please see these reports:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 113223.cms

Last month, an order for 12 more jets was cleared for ₹11,000 crore.

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/why-su-30 ... an-su-30s/

HAL is currently producing the Su-30MKI at an estimated cost of around $62 million per aircraft

https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/2755 ... ghter-jets

There are varying reports about the price of the Rafale, ranging between $100 and $120 million per piece in the most basic configuration.

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/at-e7-8b- ... n-rafales/

If you look at the first Egyptian Rafale deal signed in 2015 worth €5.2 billion, for 24 aircraft, the cost per aircraft works out to be around €216 million per unit. That is exactly the price that India got its first tranche of 36 Rafales for,

At prevailing market rate of 82 rupees to the dollar, it turns out to be $111M per plane including lifecycle costs or $63 million when only considering the unit cost whereas a Rafale cost based on the 2016 deal India signed, is well over $300 million per plane after you include the lifecycle cost or $120M when only considering the unit cost.

So I think my point of getting 208 more planes in upgraded version cheaper than getting the 114 MRFA is fairly supported and still stands.

[konaseema]

Mere comparison of numbers of 2 air forces leads to dooms day scenarios. We can never match the Chinese PLAAF numbers even with 42 squadrons or even if we convert all 42 to either one of Su-30 MKI or Rafale's. You don't deploy all your assets against one enemy and neither China nor India can afford to or will do that. India's defense policy is to defend every inch of its sovereign territory to its last man and last bullet. That said, it's a matter of increasing the quality of the existing assets & to add more assets that will allow us to achieve our strategic objectives. Have we ever heard any serving generals or veterans boasting that we will defeat the Chinese? You will always hear them say giving the Chinese a bloody nose. In our defense doctrines, it is to be believed that the Chinese need NOT be defeated but needs to be given a bloody nose which will further deter Chinese from going any further. IAF, IN and IA should have their respective strategies to achieve just that. The current govt is India's best bet to achieve true strategic defense autonomy through Atmanirbarta. We may have our disagreements on the pace at which it is being carried out depending on the projects, the money that is ploughed into Indian MIC to achieve that and the budgetary allocation for Military R&D. My humble 2 cents.

[Rakesh]

And why does this have to be MRFA? This squadron deficiency was long recognized over 10 years ago and we are nowhere in selecting a plan for the MRFA but continuing to engage in chai biskoot. What does that tell you? MRFA is simply too expensive and will not give you the numbers you are looking for.

Since you don't want to do the math , I will do it for you.

1) Nine Tejas Mk1A squadrons
2) Twelve Tejas Mk2 squadrons (your own claim)
3) Thirteen Su-30MKI squadrons
4) Two Rafale squadrons

3 and 4 on that list are confirmed and 1 is more or less confirmed. Only the second point needs confirmation. But let us go with that. Thus, 9 + 12 + 13 + 2 = 36 squadrons. We are still short of 6 squadrons to hit the magic number of 42. And this is assuming, every other variable is constant (funding, budgets, elections, second tranche of Tejas Mk2s is ordered, etc).

The MiG-29UPG, Mirage 2000I/TI and Jaguar squadrons will all be retired, by the time the above happens. Your wishful plans about doubling the Rambha fleet - to 480 airframes - to make up the numbers is not going to happen, because Air HQ will not allow it. But make sure you hold a placard in front of Vayu Bhavan, asking them why. On the placard write, HARD QUESTION ---> WHY NO MORE SU-30MKIs?

I think you are going in circles trying to justify the MRFA when you say that we need numbers. If we need numbers, then there is a simple fix, Get more LCA Mk1 and MKIs for we have an existing infrastructure.

I have an even better simple fix. Retire everything, including MKI.

Just convert the IAF's combat wing into an all Tejas Mk1 fleet. Cancel Mk1A, Mk2 and ORCA. Infrastructure already exists and it is indigenous. All things considered, this is a good idea. 100% Atmanirbhar Bharat. Full Boost Up

Why waste money on doubling the Su-30MKI fleet? Just go all in on the Tejas Mk1. So around 840 Tejas Mk1s in 42 squadrons. Way cheaper than operating Su-30MKI, because the F404 turbofan is far more fuel efficient than the AL-31FP. And with 840 airframes, we can send them in large sorties - accompanied by inflight refuelers - to make up for smaller internal fuel capacity of the Tejas Mk1 vs the Su-30MKI. Also, Tejas only needs one 1 pilot while Su-30MKI needs two. And because Tejas Mk1 is considerably smaller than MKI, it is almost invisible to radar i.e. very low RCS.

Tell me what is exactly so special about the Rafales that MKIs can’t do the job. If you tell me that the MKIs have a bigger RCS than the Rafales, so what? Rafale is not exactly stealthy. You can still detect it over 100 miles away. What difference does it make when you can still see the Rafale 100 miles away even though its RCS is smaller than the MKIs? The MKIs are currently undergoing a super upgrade that would address many of its deficiencies. Is it not unreasonable to think that after the upgrade, the MKIs are just as potent as the Rafales?

If what you are claiming is true than French Rafales in Libya should have all been detected and engaged by Libyan SAMs. How many French Rafales were shot down in Libya? Better yet, how many of them were even detected by SAM systems in Libya? At least, we have conclusive proof that multiple variants of the Flanker family have been shot down in numbers over Ukraine.

Ok so by your logic, going for 100% foreign made is a lot better than going for indigenous fighter programs that we can work on making 100% sanction proof over time? I mean it won’t happen overnight but we will get there. IF we go for 100% foreign made, we will never reach the goal of being self sufficient. We will always be perpetually be dependent on foreign tech. You have to start somewhere.

Nice deflection, but that is not going to work

I will ask again ---> If the GOTUS does not approve the sale of 97 F404 turbofans for the second tranche of Tejas Mk1As, what will we do? What value is the indigenous fighter program at that stage?

Why is the IAF insisting on an indigenous turbofan for the AMCA Mk2? Just continue with the GE F414 only. Way lower risk that going in for an indigenous turbofan. Pay GE the developmental funds for the EPE variant of the F414 and install it on the AMCA Mk2.

So? We have sent in non-LO/VLO aircraft into combat before and incurred losses. This is war after all. We cannot be too squeamish about casualties. You need to accept a bloody nose to win a fight. Sure having stealthy planes would reduce casualties but it doesn’t mean it is the only way to fight. By the way, it is by no means that Rafale is a VLO plane. That is a marketing gimmick/ploy. For starters, it has canards. That is a dead giveaway. So how does Rafale perform better than the upgraded MKIs?

Stalin was famous for sending hundreds of Russian soldiers needlessly to their death in World War 2. All because his ego was more important to him, than the lives of his own citizens. What you are displaying above is Stalinesque behaviour. Casualties are OK, because after all it is not my life that is on the line. Stalin was famous for telling Russian soldiers to Die for Mother Russia! Same thing ---> You Die, but I need to stay alive and fight for Atmanirbhar Bharat.

In multiple IAF exercises between the Rafale and the Su-30MKI, the Rafale was handily beating the Su-30MKI in BVR combat. The Rafale was able to see first and shoot first - every time - resulting in a successful kill. But you will ignore this, so it is okay. Because now you will say these exercises were all "skewed" to justify the purchase of more Rafales. Because the IAF are all liars, who only want to import the latest toy. After reading the above, I am convinced that with you any conspiracy theory is now possible.

And I said that the Rafale is a LO plane, not a VLO one. Nice attempt at twisting words, but it is not going to work. Here is an article that talks about the Rafale's LO capability ---> https://www.sps-aviation.com/story/?id=4

BTW, even J-20 has canards and the PLAAF calls it a 5th generation fighter. And looking at my notes from my ChiCom indoctrination class on aviation design...I came across this gem ---> Chinese canards are VLO, while Su-30MKI's are LO and Rafale's canards are of the 1st generation variety

But we are the taxpayers. We can demand our Parliamentarians to ask the hard questions and the IAF being servient to the GOI has to answer those questions. Besides, Manihor Parrikar wasn’t exactly deferential when he rammed the LCA Tejas down the throats of the IAF brass. Now the IAF brass are singing a different tune. If Parrikar had gone by your thinking, India would not be where it is now, having a viable LCA program and ordering the Tejas in large numbers.

Then you go and demand your Parliamentarian to ask hard questions of the Govt. BTW, do you know who your Parliamentarian is?

If you don't know, you can visit the website of the self-appointed Leader of the Opposition ---> https://rahulgandhi.in/en/

At the bottom of the above home page, is a form that you can fill out listing your concerns. In that form, RaGa asks a very "cute" question --> What's On Your Mind? And that website quote's Rahul Gandhi ---> "The Congress Party is about conversation. I'm not coming here to tell you what to think, I'm coming here to listen to what you have to say."

Please tell him that you desperately want to double the Su-30MKI fleet to 480 airframes. Please fill out that form, because you are paying taxes and you have a right to ask HARD questions. Don't disappoint us now!

And Parrikar didn’t give two hoot about what the IAF brass thought. He made the IAF accepted the Tejas program. He didn’t go by your way of thinking.

I did not realise that Parrikar did not give two hoots about what the IAF thought. Thank You! That is why he did the below. This contest was of his own making. Air HQ had nothing to do with this contest. They were not even consulted. After all, how could they? They were too busy salvitating, after reading brochures on the Rafale!

Parrikar: India to Kick Off Competition for New Foreign Single-Engine Fighters
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/01 ... -fighters/
03 Jan 2017

So you want to throw in the towel and say it is just too hard?

So you don't have anyone. Thank you for proving my point.

But I will come to an online forum and demand that we ask HARD questions.

But from who? I don't have anyone in mind actually, but we must ask HARD questions.

Why not? That is how things got done in the US. Somebody had the temerity to raise hard questions and stuck his or her head out. If you are not going to challenge the current thinking, nothing will change. That is the result of your attitude and thinking.

Okay, my thinking is flawed.

But who do you have in mind to ask HARD questions on your behalf. Give me a name. Do you have one?

Continue to be dismissive of what I think, that is entirely up to you but you know what? Your statements make me dismissive of what you state in your prior posts because you are simply too deferential to what the IAF brass wants and not asking the hard questions. You are just inclined to let things go as things are.

I am seeing the bigger picture in strategic terms. I am thinking about winning wars, not battles. You are thinking about winning battles, not war. It has been proven in the past that a nation with superior production capability and superior logistics win the war almost every single time. Whatever the deficiencies Tejas have and whatever strengths Rafales have, the point remain is that we are not producing our own fighter planes in large numbers because we are starved of funds and resources that went into foreign fighter planes that we cannot procure in large numbers to offset the numerical superiority that our enemies have over us. Besides, it is not just the PLAAF we have to worry about but the PAF. There is a serious possibility that India may fight a 2 front war. IAF does not have the numbers to fight a 2 front war. That is the bigger picture I am looking at which you are not looking at. We as a nation must come up with a way to produce 4th/5th generation fighters in large number in order to withstand any onslaught by our enemy.

The thinking is so strategic and far-fetched, that you find it perfectly OK to spend billions of US $ on 208 additional Su-30MKIs with full IP rights. After all, that is what is going to make us win battles and wars. But spending billions of US $ on MRFA is a waste of money and will make us lose any future war. Investing in Russia is perfectly fine, but investing in France is very bad. Indian Govt has no vision. IAF only wants imported toys. And Su-30MKI is not imported. India makes it at HAL, so it is a local product. We are speaking to Russia, over 12 attrition replacement Su-30MKIs, only for moral support.

And at the same time, I want to also invest billions of US $ in producing our own fighter planes in LARGE numbers.

We are definitely going to win. 100%!

And the circus continues. IAF brass has been saying this for over 10 years. Are we exactly close to 114 airframes? No. GoI continues its chai biskoot and dragging its feet. What does that tell you? It is not affordable!!!! You keep saying that I would be laughed out of the room for proposing a solution for the MKIs upgrades. Well, GoI are laughing the IAF brass out of the room just as it did with the IN when IN proposed the nuclear 65k carrier version with EMALs catapult.

You will be laughed out of the room for proposing to double the MKI fleet. Good luck with that!

If you think MRFA is not going to happen, on what basis will your proposal get approved? Where is the customer's buy in?

Getting 208 more upgraded MKIs and upgrading our existing MKIs would not only bridge the technological gap but solve the falling squadron problems. 480 MKIs means 24 squadrons. We are getting 12 squadrons of Tejas Mk1A and 6 squadrons Tejas Mk2 and that makes 18 squadrons. Viola, we reached 42 squadrons. Not only that, we have simplified the supply chain because we are only supporting fewer types of planes and introducing economy of scale, instead of supporting over 7 different types of planes.

Please get the Govt to force Air HQ to agree to double the Su-30MKI fleet. You go ahead and do that first. Then come and give gyan on BRF.

I think you place way too much importance on how the IAF evaluated the MRFA and etc. That doesn’t solve the strategic issue, which is the overwhelming production advantage by China. We need to meet that issue by having our own production base.

That same importance is what led this Govt to go ahead with the MRCBF purchase. 26 Rafale Ms for the Navy does nothing for the strategic issue. But still the Govt is going ahead with the purchase. Everyone from the PMO to the MoD to the Navy are all idiots onlee.

That same importance is what led the Govt to cancel the first MMRCA contract and sign a contract for 36 aircraft. Shame on IAF. We are going to lose onlee. Someone please visit Russia and invest billions of US $ on 208 additional Su-30MKIs with full IP rights. We want to win!

Modi wanted to walk away from the entire program and concentrate on indigenous programs but Modi couldn’t because of the penalty clauses. Why would he only buy 36 Rafales? He is not stupid enough only go for 36 Rafales. He did it because it was the least expensive option. Walking away with nothing and paying a penalty is what happened to the Aussies when they walked away from the French sub program. See here: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 892688.cms

You are quoting an article from Toilet to prove your point?

You don't have a single authoritative government source, do you?

I told you this before ---> It was Air HQ that told the Govt to purchase at least 36 aircraft (two squadrons) as an interim, emergency purchase. The Govt followed that diktat. They did not overrule it.

So MKIs can do the job after all and after the upgrades it can do the job of the Rafales.

If the MKI could do the job, why use the Mirage 2000 then?

And you completely missed the point and ignored what I said. Rawat cannot exactly overrule IAF on every matter or micromanage IAF to the point where it will do exactly what he says. And besides Rawat doesn’t have that kind of power. He was only given the power to institute changes in strategic thinking and doctrinal changes. Sure he had a lot of influence but by no means he could overrule IAF brass on IAF doctrine, fighting tactics, and weapon procurements. Only IAF brass can do that and to change the IAF brass, you need to be able to replace commanders and leaders at multiple levels based on merit not seniority.

You don't have a point. That is the problem here.

Who in the IAF brass are you going to replace? Which IAF officer(s) are you going to find to replace commanders and leaders at multiple levels? What is your legal standing to remove them from their post?

Give me a name or a set of names of IAF brass who can initiate this change. Do you even have one name? Or is this another one of your crazy theories?

No it is not but it is a good learning experience and lessons learned there can be applied to the eastern theater as well. USAF is learning from that conflict as well and so are NATO countries.

Indeed a very good learning experience i.e. not send Su-30s carte blanche into a theatre of conflict.

Fully agree with you! +108!

Because procuring 208 upgraded MKIs is a lot cheaper than buying 114 MRFAs. You can persuade the IAF by firing some brass and promoting leaders that are willing to make the necessary changes.

Who are you going to fire in the IAF? If you don't have the name(s), at least what positions do they hold in the air force?

COs of Squadrons? Commanders of Air Force Stations? Senior Officers in charge of planning and procurement?

What is your legal reasoning to terminate them? Give me a legal reason, not your theory.

So your answer is to do nothing and go with the status quo? Not stick your head out and dare to ask hard questions wherever and whenever that may be? Just keep smiling and saying that he is the expert and we must trust what he says and keep nodding?

Once again, you have no name. Not a single O-N-E.

You would be surprised on how the Pentagon and US government control the USAF. They cracked heads when needed be to get their message across.

India is not the US and Pentagon is not the MoD.

Chalk it up to coincidental scheduling of deployment. They start mass production of the J-20s when the conflict broke out and they had enough planes to send them into Tibet. Whether it was a response to Rafale or not, it didn’t matter. PLAAF had always planned to station J-20s in Tibet.

I am not going to bite You believe that.

[LakshmanPST]

Please see these reports:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 113223.cms

Last month, an order for 12 more jets was cleared for ₹11,000 crore.

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/why-su-30 ... an-su-30s/

HAL is currently producing the Su-30MKI at an estimated cost of around $62 million per aircraft

https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/2755 ... ghter-jets

There are varying reports about the price of the Rafale, ranging between $100 and $120 million per piece in the most basic configuration.

https://www.eurasiantimes.com/at-e7-8b- ... n-rafales/

If you look at the first Egyptian Rafale deal signed in 2015 worth €5.2 billion, for 24 aircraft, the cost per aircraft works out to be around €216 million per unit. That is exactly the price that India got its first tranche of 36 Rafales for,

At prevailing market rate of 82 rupees to the dollar, it turns out to be $111M per plane including lifecycle costs or $63 million when only considering the unit cost whereas a Rafale cost based on the 2016 deal India signed, is well over $300 million per plane after you include the lifecycle cost or $120M when only considering the unit cost.

So I think my point of getting 208 more planes in upgraded version cheaper than getting the 114 MRFA is fairly supported and still stands.

Proposed Su30 MKI deal of 11000 Crores only includes Aircraft and Ground systems at $111M per plane... I searched on the net and I couldn't find any mention of lifecycle costs...

If we put aside the proposed deal for a while, here is the summary of all deals signed fot Su30MKIs--->
https://www.angelfire.com/falcon/fighte ... icost.html

We signed 2 deals for assembly of Su30s from kits, one in 2007 for 40 jets and other in 2012 for 42 jets...
They costed around $40-50 Million per jet...

The deal for 140 jets for local manufacture signed back in 2000 has gone up to almost $70 million per jet...

Fact is, the deals for assembly were signed 17 years back and 12 years back respectively... There is significant inflation and escalation to be considered and also Covid, Ukraine and Israel wars...

Moreover, these are non-upgraded jets...
-
The deal for Super Sukhoi upgradation proposed is 60000 Crores...
It was not clear whether this cost pertains to 84 jets or 200 jets... If it is for 84 jets, it is almost $87 Million per jet and if it is for 200 jets, it would cost $37 Million per jet...
-
Depending on the contract, per Unit cost of upgraded Su30MKI will come around $100 Million at the very least, without including lifecycle costs...
----
Coming to Rafale, cost per jet as per 2016 deal (Basic jet + Indian Specific Enhancements) is around 138.9 Million Euros, which is $152 Million per jet...

Also, the total cost of 2016 deal is 7.87 Billion Euros or 8.7 Billion Dollars... This includes Basic jet + India Specific Enhancements + Life cycle costs + Weapons...
Merely dividing the figure by 36 jets gives you per unit cost of 218 million Euros or 241 Million Dollars... I don't know where you got the $300 Million per jet figure...
----
Su30s are definitely not as cheap as you're trying to project them to be...

[Karan M]

@HGupta ji...
I think the discussion originally started with "Why not more Su30s...?". It now deviated to something else...
----
Why not more Su30s...?
It was already answered above by Rakesh ji...
It is a 4th Gen Airframe with its own limitations like high RCS etc., which can not be used for some missions without inviting high attrition rate...
So, we need other more modern jets like Tejas and Rafale to take up these missions...

Nothing of the sort, the Su-30 is IAFs preeminent striker and I'll detail why. IAF looked at even Jaguars with SAAWs to hit Balakot. It finally decided on Mirage 2000s as they has both Spice and Crystal Maze. Latter would provide both BDA and overkill, whereas former was fire & forger and could be launched at night too. And had good range.

IAF wanted safety ie long range and extreme precision. It didn't even go for Brahmos from MKI as the strike would be devastating and risk collateral damage.

All said and done, 4 Su30s accompanied the Mirages as escorts.

Going forward it's the Su30s that will pull more strike missions as they are getting weapons the Mirages aren't. These include the SAAW, LRGB both winged and standard, PGHSLD both winged and standard, Nirbhay, Brahmos, the Israeli Rock and most importantly the Rudram series. The mix of all these munitions plus the upgrade and Astra series AAMs would make the Su30 the preeminent strike platform in the IAF inventory.

[LakshmanPST]

^^^I never mentioned Balakot or Strike missions... I guess someone else did...
I only said "some missions", where I was referring to Rakesh Sir's post regarding SEAD/DEAD or Breaking-the-door missions...