MCA vs RPSA/UCAV: Advantages vs Disadvantages

[Rakesh]

Let us have a discussion on Manned Combat Aircraft (MCA) vs RPSA (Remotely Piloted Strike Aircraft) / UCAV (Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle).

Please list out the advantages & disadvantages of both platforms. Lets also rope into the discussion the glaring elephant in the room ---> in this modern (& ever changing) age of aerial warfare, are manned combat aircraft really viable (i.e. loss/capture of aircrew) versus her unmanned counterparts and also precision guided missiles (subsonic i.e. Nirbhay, supersonic i.e. BrahMos, hypersonic i.e. Brahmos-II and LR-AShM, etc). Lets Go!

Also, what role can manned combat aircraft realistically provide (beyond serving as mother ships for RPSAs / UCAVs)? Now before someone mentions air superiority as a still viable role for MCAs, let me remind that IAF undertook that very mission against the PAF on the night of May 10th (during Op Sindoor) and it was all via BrahMos missiles. Now most certainly, the enemy will try new counter tactics to overcome that, but then lets discuss that as well.

In addition, also provide inputs on what an ideal ratio of MCA vs RSPA/UCAVs should be? For Example ---> Should it be 1:2 (For every 1 MCA, there will be 2 RPSA / UCAVs) OR should the ratio be higher, in favour of the latter? Whatever ratio you feel is ideal, please provide your reasoning as well.

Manned Combat Aircraft
• Tejas Mk1A
• Rafale F3R(I)
• Su-30UPG (Super Sukhoi)

This is the future fighter fleet of the IAF (for now). So consider these platforms to start off with.

RPSA / UCAV
• Ghatak (viewtopic.php?t=8023)
• CATS (viewtopic.php?t=7991)

[Manish_Sharma]

Seems to me overwhelming advantage to RPSA:

~should be shorter development time for RPSA compared to MCA as even a few crashes won't make too big of dent psychologically, just like cruise missile like Nirbhay keeps failing & crashing but isn't seen as a big deal

~Human pilot risk factor in war, in case of pilot capture is a morale buster for masses, While shooting down of unmanned hardly registers, he'll even Houthis are taking down MQ9s & hardly a ripple

~Less wastage of space & weight for Human needs:
Cockpit, o2 cylinder/obogs, ejection systems et al. Space & weight saved can help with more payload, more space for fuel not to mention more space for sensors

[Mukesh.Kumar]

While I believe the overall RPSA vs MCA debate weighs favorably towards RPSA's, RPSA's are still vulnerable to hostile takeovers or spoofing. Whether it be signal interception, jamming, malaware introduction in embedded systems like a Day 0 attack (by Unkill/ Lizard), or even corruption of the AI Models.

An MCA, in contrast will be more difficult to takeover, and hence I see air forces rely on MCA's for some time.

Other than this I feel the balance weights heavily towards RPSA's vs MCA's

[bala]

RPSA are as good as the smarts they were programmed and the good sensors they have. Though they can optionally have ground based human controllers. MCA has human ingenuity that can be surprising. One thing RPSA bring about is that when swarms of them attack they can overwhelm any defence mechanism. They can be programmed to work as single team for any task and in formation synch can cause untold damage.