Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

johnj

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
1,776
Likes
2,672
If all that you say is true why don't we just order 200 Mk1a & who cares whether Mk2 comes in 2028 or 2030? Also, why is the Chief of Air staff keep insisting on MRFA 2.0? What additional capabilities does he want that can't be provided by Tejas Mk1A? (Do note that MRFA 2.0 is not about stealth).
Need more combat range for deep strike, long range strike, cap etc, and IAF considered mwf.
 

SilentlAssassin265

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,861
Likes
5,373
Country flag
No aim120c7/c8/d in paf.
Can a Mk1 take on F16 blk 52 with AIM 120C one on one? - its depend on israel/drdo spj/ew pod.
Except stealth aircraft LCA capable of defending/intercept any jet including mki,j10.f16,j16 etc
we still using mig21 and used to intercept f16, jf17.
Stealth aircraft will mostly be used for SEAD missions rather than air to air battle as stealth gets compromised while firing a weapon and using afterburner
 

johnj

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
1,776
Likes
2,672
Stealth aircraft will mostly be used for SEAD missions rather than air to air battle as stealth gets compromised while firing a weapon and using afterburner
F22, Su 57 etc are air superiority fighters, J20 is more like interceptor.
Only F35 capable of SEAD missions against high end AD s/ms.
Stealth aircrafts designed for primarily to avoiding AD s/ms not for SEAD missions. SEAD missions mainly done using stand off missiles,ARMs etc.
B21 & H20 capable of SEAD missions.
 

silverghost

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2022
Messages
153
Likes
330
Country flag
Maybe not 200. But we need more MK1As if we are ever going to reach the 42 squadron sanctioned strength anytime soon.
I honestly now feel that ADA/HAL should have taken IAF's feedback & focussed on Mk2. We would have had one already flying by now. Serial production by 2025. Water under the bridge anyway!
 

Gyyan

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2022
Messages
1,469
Likes
9,311
Country flag
I honestly now feel that ADA/HAL should have taken IAF's feedback & focussed on Mk2. We would have had one already flying by now. Serial production by 2025. Water under the bridge anyway!
Problem is we stop at the first upgrade.
Everyone inducts even the shittiest of aircraft and then upgrades it to a formidable fighter not to mention others mostly do a CDR after rollout but we do it in design phase to save money.
We should have kept upgrading aircraft and keep them fielding faster there should have been plans for tejas mk1B and so on improving it to something even better.
Examples are everywhere even pakistanis do this look at thunder on how it started as the shittiest plane to come out in the decade and then they kept upgrading it and fielding it faster now it's a formidable fighter jet.
 

Blademaster

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
9,217
Likes
26,964
Problem is we stop at the first upgrade.
Everyone inducts even the shittiest of aircraft and then upgrades it to a formidable fighter not to mention others mostly do a CDR after rollout but we do it in design phase to save money.
We should have kept upgrading aircraft and keep them fielding faster there should have been plans for tejas mk1B and so on improving it to something even better.
Examples are everywhere even pakistanis do this look at thunder on how it started as the shittiest plane to come out in the decade and then they kept upgrading it and fielding it faster now it's a formidable fighter jet.
The problem is that the GoI is so stingy with its purse. The MoD keeps dragging everything out and the Finance Ministry questioning every little item to no end. Bureaucracy at work here.
 

MirageBlue

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2020
Messages
559
Likes
3,277
Country flag
Mig 35 is a decent platform if we get the full TOT, from building the airframe to engine. If they offer 100%.
MK 2 is still on drawing if ever it materialises.
Move on..the MiG-35 is a dead duck now. There is not going to be any nation looking for a Russian fighter (except for Iran which has no other choice) given what is happening in Ukraine. Their Military-Industrial complex will be under sanctions and there will be tremendous backlash if any large military deals are signed with them in the near future.

Besides, the Russians themselves haven't yet done much with the MiG-35. The future for the IAF is the Tejas Mk1A, Tejas Mk2 and the MRFA. MiG-35 doesn't fit in anywhere.
 

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,479
Likes
17,799
Move on..the MiG-35 is a dead duck now. There is not going to be any nation looking for a Russian fighter (except for Iran which has no other choice) given what is happening in Ukraine. Their Military-Industrial complex will be under sanctions and there will be tremendous backlash if any large military deals are signed with them in the near future.
It is interesting for its price tag on the condition that we can wrest Russia to give full TOT.
Russian MIC is still in better shape than it was in 1990s, so let's wait and see who blinks first.

Besides, the Russians themselves haven't yet done much with the MiG-35. The future for the IAF is the Tejas Mk1A, Tejas Mk2 and the MRFA. MiG-35 doesn't fit in anywhere.
I doubt we can afford a fleet of +100Rafale,hence the possible entry of Mig 35.
But as discussed IAF is no longer interested with new Russian platform.
 

SilentlAssassin265

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
1,861
Likes
5,373
Country flag
It is interesting for its price tag on the condition that we can wrest Russia to give full TOT.
Russian MIC is still in better shape than it was in 1990s, so let's wait and see who blinks first.


I doubt we can afford a fleet of +100Rafale,hence the possible entry of Mig 35.
But as discussed IAF is no longer interested with new Russian platform.
If iaf wanted Russian platform they would have kept fgfa alive, it would have been better choice than su30 upgrade
 

MirageBlue

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2020
Messages
559
Likes
3,277
Country flag
If iaf wanted Russian platform they would have kept fgfa alive, it would have been better choice than su30 upgrade
Dropping the FGFA was one of the wisest decisions that the IAF took, despite the sunk cost of $270 million. That program is genuinely going nowhere. Russia is hesitant to even use the Su-57 in the Ukrainian theater for fears of a massive PR embarrassment. Despite the fact that the Ukrainian theater is the perfect lab to hone and finetune the Su-57 and taste combat.
 

Corvus Splendens

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
3,910
Likes
25,568
Country flag
Dropping the FGFA was one of the wisest decisions that the IAF took, despite the sunk cost of $270 million. That program is genuinely going nowhere. Russia is hesitant to even use the Su-57 in the Ukrainian theater for fears of a massive PR embarrassment. Despite the fact that the Ukrainian theater is the perfect lab to hone and finetune the Su-57 and taste combat.
Would've been a good replacement for the Su30 in the heavy category atleast. The payload capacity and range is nothing to sneeze at. Not to mention this thing flies with a lot of onboard sensors.
1672985871014.png
 

MirageBlue

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2020
Messages
559
Likes
3,277
Country flag
Would've been a good replacement for the Su30 in the heavy category atleast. The payload capacity and range is nothing to sneeze at. Not to mention this thing flies with a lot of onboard sensors.
View attachment 188509
Replacing the Su-30MKI with AMCA Mk2 would be more than good enough. The benefits it offers to India over a Su-57 design that India had 0% say in, are immeasurably greater. And anyway the oldest Su-30MKI doesn't need replacing till 2040, so why should the IAF be stuck in a program where it had so little say in, till then? A good Su-30MKI upgrade program will keep the fleet relevant till 2045 easily.

For the FGFA program, we would've had a Su-57 line at Nashik to replace the Su-30MKI line and have been paying royalty to Russia with forced imports of raw materials (as it was in the MKI contract). Nothing would've been learnt by our engineers and our own AMCA program would've ground to a halt since IAF cannot support 2 5th gen designs in large numbers. It was a JV only in name, since the IAF and HAL had almost no say in it's design or it's requirement definition phase.

With the AMCA, the IAF is involved from the get-go and has to take ownership of the program for it to have a successful 5th gen fighter program. They know it well and the alternatives are very limited to say the least.

As it stands, the RuAF itself isn't using the Su-57 to take on any Su-30SM missions. The bulk of the RuAF air defence effort is still in the hands of it's Su-35, Su-30SM and Su-27 fleet.
 

Corvus Splendens

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
3,910
Likes
25,568
Country flag
As it stands, the RuAF itself isn't using the Su-57 to take on any Su-30SM missions. The bulk of the RuAF air defence effort is still in the hands of it's Su-35, Su-30SM and Su-27 fleet.
That's because the mission profile in Ukraine doesn't require it's use. The Su-57 was designed for air superiority hence the PAK-FA designation. Plus NATO airborn intel assets are watching everything wide awake and Russians are bracing for eventual direct involvement of NATO forces. Also the fact that they only built a squadron's worth of Su-57s doesn't help either.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top