All I can say is that we don't have the kind of CAPEX to throw around on acquiring a new fighter every decade for the Navy
We bought a new fighter for IAF in 2000s (MKI)
LCA MK1 in mid 10s
Rafale in 2020
LCA MK2 is supposed to be inducted in late 20s
AMCA in 2030s.
Difference between IAF's and IN's modernisation budget has come down to just 6-7k cr from 20-25k just a few years ago, it will likely match it in the 30s and surpass in the 40s. IN can definitely afford TEDBF in the early-mid 30s (when it will be ready) & another in the mid-late 40s. New generation technologies are to be developed for AMCA MK1 & 2, advancement will be made in the same field as a decade passes.by, a NG naval combat aircraft can get it in the mid-late 40s. I have already stated why N AMCA won't have much of it's VLO capability when fulfilling the basic requirement of IN, a new aircraft after TEDBF is necessary & should be pursued. Both can work in tandem on our future carriers.
[/QUOTE]
especially when the existing fighters are still capable and have life left.
what fighters? MiG-29K/KUB? or the 26 MRCBF? One of them won't have any life left and the other won't be in sufficient numbers, Navy will also need shore based fighters and fighters for IAC-2 at that time, an equilibrium can be reached with MRCBF stationed at the naval air station and TEDBF on the deck of IAC-1 & 2 (or whatever comes next) which can then be accompanied by a new generation fighter in mid-late 40s.
The expenditure during that period (2030s-40s) will be perhaps even tighter than it is now due to several big-ticket programs coming online (SSNs, IAC-2) simultaneously.
It will be larger at the same time, the capacity will be of making >4 nuclear powered sub simultaneously (including S5), IN only has to pay for 6 SSN (~1.2L cr), that amount is likely to be paid in full by mid 30s (the shipyard has to be allocated the funds for last subs some years b4 they are delivered, same happened with P-75), Navy believes it can build the SSN & IAC-2 simultaneously and the fact that navy will have sufficient funds for IAC-2 has been reiterated by Admiral Sunil Lamba & KB Singh. Most of the expenditure happens when the ship is at the stage of 40-65% physical completion, that will be between early-mid 30s, Navy will have sufficient funds to fund a new project and purchase TEDBF for the rest of the decade and the 40s. The expenditure and the budget will both grow, nothing is stagnating here. The procurement funds for surface & sub surface combatants will increase at the same rate.
Once we buy MRCBF, it will remain on Vikrant till the end of their service lives (2055-2065).
Already said by the navy that this is not going to be the case, the aircraft operating from the flight deck of IAC-1 will be TEDBF, MRCBF jets can be deployed for other roles or sold off to some friendly country in the
40s, when TEDBF is a proven platform and a NG aircraft is certain.
and their replacement at that time cannot realistically be another 4.5 gen.
Hence the need to fund development of a new generation naval combat aircraft & get it by mid-late 40s. TEDBF can start phasing out in the mid 60s (when initial frames would be ~30 yrs old).
Last year one journalist reported that there would 8 N-LCAs too...what happened to that plan?
He likely took that from the same report, 12 MiG-29K + 8 N LCA/Sea harriers. It is to be seen if Navy is willing to buy N LCA for training role, leave aside combat. We'll have to wait & see what happens.
