MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[randomradio]

Though I earlier argued against acquisition of Rafales in such huge numbers for such humungous sum, my opinion has changed now.

We have also to consider the possibility of failure of the Tejas Mk2 program or delays therein. What if there is a design error which stretches the development and refinement for few more years or beyond 2035? We will be left only with induction of 180 Mk1A till 2035, if we will not buy the Rafales in bulk numbers. At the same time Jaguars, Mig-29 and Mirages will be at the end of their lives. It will cripple the IAF for at least 2 decades and will be disastrous for our defence preparedness.

Anyway I don't believe that the Tejas Mk2 will mature before 2032-33 even if the first flight is this year itself. Fighter jets take years for refinment and fine tuning. We are still doing that for Tejas Mk1A, despite having the template with Mk1.

Rafales will be our safety net and allow our domestic programs enough time to mature, in case things go wrong.

A proven jet must always be available to act as a hedge against ongoing development works. That's always been the case for decades.

But Rafale goes even beyond that due to the need for next gen tech. We entirely lack mature 5th gen tech in sufficient numbers today. Some of the MKIs should have had AESA radars 10 years ago. The Russians screwed the pooch on that one.

 

[randomradio]

I have my own ideology as to what the J-20 does, and how its designed to perform. I would be going off topic if I gave an explanation beyond what I'm about to blabber about here, but I feel like the tactic of destroying their airfields with munitions like the Brahmos, SCALP-EG, AASM HAMMER, RAMPAGE, and SAAWs (as were utilised in the latter half of Op Sindoor), would be the key to subduing the Chinese aerial advantage. By taking out their airfields, as they will no doubt try to do to ours (though we have a far higher saturation of ADSs on our side, as far as I am aware), we can greatly suppress their single greatest advantage over India, their massive advantage in the air, both technologically and numerically (I say suppress and not eliminate as they'll probably use their massive road/infrastructure development as emergency landing strips). The Rafale, as we've seen, is very good at the A2G role, and the sophistication SPECTRA will certainly help it, and us, significantly when it comes to SEAD/DEAD.

China, almost certainly, cannot focus its entire force on us (certainly not its 5th Gens, again, it comes down to my deduction of what the J-20 is meant to do). It has to keep a sizeable chunk of its armed forces (including its most advanced units, so the more modern J-20A/S and J-35As) at its borders with Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, in order to project its power and dissuade any American advances. I think the Rafale will still perform extremely well against their platforms like the modernised J-11s, J-10s, J-16s, and may have a fighting chance against the J-20s, if India assumes an offensive A2A posture and effectively uses its force multipliers. The real threats in my mind are things like the GJ-11, and their stealth wingman drones/UCAVs, their only real counter would be either a 5th Gen, something like the CATS Warrior, or the Ghatak/RPSV UCAV if equipped with AAMs. (I believe that the ROEs were behind our subpar performance in the air during Sindoor, which was contrasted by the brilliant usage of our ADSs)

Another major thing I've realised by looking at the recent conflicts is that most 5th Gens are honestly quite a middling choice of aircraft after you've both obtained air superiorty and once SEAD has been conducted. 4.5 Gens are many times cheaper to operate, are more rugged/resilient, require lower maintenance, have significantly higher payload capacities and are capable of carrying a far more diverse set of armament (which IWBs can constrain). Longer loiter + combat ranges also make them extremely useful for CAPs and long range strike missions in contested areas, where an MRTT or Tanker would be a prime target. IMO, 4.5 Gens hit that sweet spot of reduced RCS, endurance, operational availability, and heavy-duty capabilities. This is not to say 5th gen aircraft are not important, or that they are a fad of any sort. They will absolutely be essential for any first-tier air force, such as the IAF, and are certainly the future (along with UCAVs) of aerial warfare. Its just that 4.5 Gens will remain essential, in my opinion, for a very long time.

The Rafale deal, I believe, also upgrades our existing F3R fleet to the F4 standard, which would be highly beneficial. If I'm right, this deal does enable us to integrate our own weapons locally, but no more than that in terms of fiddling with the software. I absolutely agree that we should not put all our eggs in one basket, regarding Tejas Mk2 just yet. However, I feel like about 180~200 Tejas Mk2s would be sufficient instead of say ~300 for three main reasons, and a few other smaller points here and there:
1. I think the AMCA programme will aim to induct around 200~240 aircraft, and that will serve as the backbone of the IAF for years to come.

2. India might procure the Su-57 as an interim solution regarding 5th Gens. For us, it is definitely a better choice than the F-35 purely due to the fact that we will not need to surrender any sort of strategic autonomy or bend to the whims and fancies of the US. It is a very capable airframe, especially in the A2G role, far more so than the F-35 is as far as I'm aware. Despite the speculation around its RCS (which might not be wholly accurate either), the advantages it can provide us are substantial (A rapid induction/delivery timeframe, localised production, ToT, it meshing into the existing 30MKI's supply and logistical chains really well, and Indian upgrades/missiles amongst other things). Again, this is in part related to the point you made regarding Tejas Mk2 not being wholly mature.

3. In the future, there may be a surge in the usage of Wingman Drones/UCAVs like the Ghatak, and possibly the Dassault nEUROn, to supplement our 4.5 Gen fleet. Thus enabling them to at least go toe-to-toe with 5th Gen aircraft, this might just replace the need to induct as many manned airframes.

201 Mk2s are likely to happen. 300 only if the private sector agrees to create a new line supplementing HAL's order for 118 jets. IAF has promised to order 180 if that happens, while freezing HAL's numbers at 118. Not sure if that's on the table now with AMCA going entirely to the private sector.

Unknown how far AMCA will go yet. We may see a modernization.

Su-57 in its current form is unlikely, at least as per my opinion. The new engine is still an interim engine from the AL-31F line. The focus might shift to the two-seat version if it has a proper 6th gen roadmap. Maybe not even that. Import focus after Rafale has switched to 6th gen.

 

[randomradio]

The issue is that China will have 1k stealth jets by 2033 ish. They simply have so many jets that putting a few against in the tibetian border would still completely dwarf our force.
A stop gap wouldn't really be so effective compared to a force of say 120 ish su57s. This is precisely why im so hesitant with respect to rafales. Theyre good but they can do jackshit against china by the early 2030s. Our upgraded su30s are the only jets in the 4.5 gen category that truly stand even a sliver of a chance. Unless ofc they start mass producing and completely covering the entire border with a high density of mobile photonic radar units(assuming their powerful enough ofc)
Like i said In case of a 2 front war we need complete and swift dominance over pakistan. Even then the pakistani army is large enough to give us trouble when they cooperate with the chinese, on their own theyre not great but with chinese intel and coop as well as the gifting of equipment they would become a relatively decent force.

The Russo-ukraine war is the ultimate decider. If it continues onto 2028 then say bye bye to su57. Nobody knows, maybe the 114 rafale deal is a screen to get europe to shut up and all the US deals are also for US to shut up cause CAATSA would just be stupid against us with so many active deals in implementation. They might waiver considering our only neighbours are pakistan and china and they need china to position at least some 5th gens on the tibet/ easterns side of china. God knows what the GOI is going to do. Hell i doubt they know what theyre going to do in this fked up situation.

At the end of the day we also have to realise that our economic relations with the EU vastly outweigh relations with russia. For the future we need EU-India relations to be friendly. With the ukraine war EU will respond very poorly to any military buy from russia, hell just oil got them worked up now imagine weapons. Although we could say we had no choice since the US will never sell a F35 to someone with a russian AD like the s400.

Air combat in the 2030s will be network-centric, not platform-centric. The ability to defeat the enemy will rely more on the control of the EM spectrum itself than a notional idea of invisibility in a narrow band. Essentially, while J-20 is "stealth," it's not enough anymore.

J-20 cannot meaningfully handle Tibet in any case. They have to come in from further inland using refueling. That's why China's not developed the region for air combat. Most of the infra in Tibet is centered around supporting the PLAGF in the mountains, like helicopter and drone bases and air defenses. Their only J-20 presence in Tibet is now in Shigatse, 14 jets in total. The J-20 is only half as capable as when operating from the plains.

 

[DerBerserker]

201 Mk2s are likely to happen. 300 only if the private sector agrees to create a new line supplementing HAL's order for 118 jets. IAF has promised to order 180 if that happens, while freezing HAL's numbers at 118. Not sure if that's on the table now with AMCA going entirely to the private sector.

Unknown how far AMCA will go yet. We may see a modernization.

Su-57 in its current form is unlikely, at least as per my opinion. The new engine is still an interim engine from the AL-31F line. The focus might shift to the two-seat version if it has a proper 6th gen roadmap. Maybe not even that. Import focus after Rafale has switched to 6th gen.

As I see it with the Su-57, the interim AL-41F1S engines are still fine, it's just a matter of getting the intended engine for their design, the Izdeliye 30 (AL-51F). I mean, the Boramae Mk2 and AMCA will use F-414s, the J-35A uses RD-33 styled WS-19, with lower profile sawtooth nozzles even the 57 should be fine really. The problem is that delaying or avoiding the acquisition of even a middling 5th Gen puts us significantly further behind our adversaries at this point of time.
I believe the IAF really has no choice in that regard. The two seater 57 will be very beneficial but I wonder if it could be offset technologically. That and is it even worth prioritising a 2nd pilot to the point we end up lagging behind about 8~10 years (and increasing) behind the PLAAF, which is where we currently are imo?

 

[randomradio]

India will not trust EU in critical matters. EU simply does not have the same leverage as US in terms of controlling other countries.

Right now Militarily, India needs EU in fighter jets, Aero Engines, gas turbines(Zoria-Mashproekt) . Economically, India needs EU in technology and investment(FDI into India).

India definitely will never antagonize Russia in critical matters. India will bank on the assumption that Russia will never attack a EU country.

But you are right in the sense that hostile Russian and EU relations are a huge thorn for us.

Once this Ukraine-Russia war ends(lets say 2030), Russia will start modernising its MIC for the next 10 years before it attacks any other country in Europe or worse EUROPEAN UNION.

So, India has got like a 15 year window before which we have to get all critical military technologies like Aero Engines, fighter jet manufacturing, Gas turbines.

Our relationship with the EU is independent of Russia. And even they understand our position.

 

[DerBerserker]

Air combat in the 2030s will be network-centric, not platform-centric. The ability to defeat the enemy will rely more on the control of the EM spectrum itself than a notional idea of invisibility in a narrow band. Essentially, while J-20 is "stealth," it's not enough anymore.

J-20 cannot meaningfully handle Tibet in any case. They have to come in from further inland using refueling. That's why China's not developed the region for air combat. Most of the infra in Tibet is centered around supporting the PLAGF in the mountains, like helicopter and drone bases and air defenses. Their only J-20 presence in Tibet is now in Shigatse, 14 jets in total. The J-20 is only half as capable as when operating from the plains.

Additionally, there are doubts being raised about the actual stealthiness of the J-20 now. Add to that (what I surmise to be) the intended design purpose of the airframe, and the J-20 isn't an untouchable aircraft like the F-22 is, at the ranges we would encounter it at - it just needs to be handled differently. As for Shigatse, its well within the range of Indian munitions. Disabling their runways are, as I said, an easy way to level the playing field rapidly. The real problem would be evading the domestic long range Chinese SAMs, for which again, the Rafale (in this case) when over friendly territory is likely more than capable of doing.

 

[randomradio]

Yea i dont believe that news about the su30mki track. Seems like a classic **** article or someone from their ilk.
the numbers game is obvious but stealth on its own is worth a lot so they vastly outclass in both tech and scale. Its not close right now and wont be for another 20 yrs or so until we slowly catch up the same way china did with the US over the decades.

The 30MKI track report might not be wholly innacurate since they probably had something like Luneberg Lenses equipped as it was just a patrol flight afaik. That and the true RCS of the J-20 is still unknown, the aspect it was seen at will also matter, as its probably optimised for a reduced frontal RCS.
And as for when I said the Rafale had a good shot at taking out the J-20, I assumed that GBI or an AEWACS would be involved. Otherwise, and even then (in a best case scenario), the chances of scoring a kill are basically extremely low lol. The SPECTRA system will probably help it survive the engagement if its reasonably far away, but it probably will not be able to fire on the target without external help making it kinda useless overall. We need something like the nEUROn or Ghatak (Stealth UCAV/Wingman) with a 4.5 Gen to actually combat 5th Gens.

The MKI tracking the J-20 came from ACM Dhanoa during Gaganshakti. But what he meant was the J-20 is not stealthy enough to defeat even an old fighter radar. "Even MKI can track it." And that only true stealth jets are Neuron and B-2. Point being 5th gen stealth with vertical fins and powerful engines do not qualify as stealth jets. He even pointed out that FGFA is more stealthy than the J-20.

He also said Rafale with Meteor will easily defeat the J-20, ie, the Meteor's seeker can spot the J-20's canards while maneuvering.

This is consistent with Western evaluations of the J-20 too.

CCTV too revealed that the J-35's palm-sized RCS is Western class and much smaller than the J-20, which puts it in the same RCS class as a golf ball.

That would mean the J-20's RCS is marginally better than the Rafale's clean frontal RCS (0.04-0.08 m2), which the Rafale can artificially reduce by 100 more times, marble size, or 10 times with weapons, ie, golf ball size.

 

[randomradio]

As I see it with the Su-57, the interim AL-41F1S engines are still fine, it's just a matter of getting the intended engine for their design, the Izdeliye 30 (AL-51F). I mean, the Boramae Mk2 and AMCA will use F-414s, the J-35A uses RD-33 styled WS-19, with lower profile sawtooth nozzles even the 57 should be fine really.

The interim engines only boost thrust by another 15%. It's pointless beyond just zipping around at mach 1.6 while Rafale can do mach 1.4.

You would be paying $30-40B or even $10B for a capability that adds practically nothing to the IAF. In the end you still have limited stealth and underpowered avionics.

And don't trust the snake oil merchants claiming an AL-31F derived engine is 5th gen just 'cause it delivers more thrust. Izd 30 is the minimum necessary to make Su-57 a true stealth jet or else it is even less than Rafale F4.

The Koreans don't claim KF-21 B1/B2 is a stealth jet anyway. Their goal is to get an incrementally better Typhoon using the F414. B2 is just the FOC version of B1. Their stealth version is called KF-21 B3 and is expected to get a 5th gen engine.

The problem is that delaying or avoiding the acquisition of even a middling 5th Gen puts us significantly further behind our adversaries at this point of time.

It would depend on where you stand concerning its standing as a stealth jet relative to the Rafale.

The Rafale has showed off capabilities in Sindoor that only stealth jets can do. And Dassault officials are on record claiming the Rafale's RCS is that of a sparrow. Picdel is a source too, considering he was number 4 in Dassault and his clearance is the highest possible in France. He's worked on/was in charge of anti-submarine (Atlantique), space (Galileo), and nuclear programs (Laser Megajoule) too. He also ran/supported France's nuclear chain of command.

If someone with his credentials claims Rafale is stealthy, I don't see any reason to doubt it. Plus the IAF will verify that claim anyway.

Picdel's junior, a VP in Dassault, publicly claimed the Rafale's frontal RCS is that of a sparrow in a documentary. And Picdel claims while Rafale's clean RCS is 0.0001m2 class, it drops down to 0.01-0.001m2 depending on the payload + some physical limitations he wouldn't reveal. And that this type of stealth is upgradeable.

CSIR-NAL agrees with that assessment too. My post regarding that...

Post in thread 'Indian AESA Radar Developments'

Mar 14, 2026

More on active cancelation fro CSIR-NAL.



What all those words mean:


The conclusion they reached.



And now, they are working on active cancelation for incorporation into Indian aircraft. AMCA, TEDBF, Ghatak, and LCA Mk2, all 4 can be equipped with it.

And this bit is very, very important.
"As compared to passive cancellation of scattered power, active RCS reduction is more feasible and practical as it requires less power, and has got cost-effective advantages."

What it means is active cancelation is easier than shaping-based stealth. That's...

• randomradio

• 
• 

Combine stealth with next gen avionics, weapons, and flight performance, like supercruise, you can see why the IAF prefers Rafale over everything else.

@Jarvis @lmaoxd

I believe the IAF really has no choice in that regard. The two seater 57 will be very beneficial but I wonder if it could be offset technologically. That and is it even worth prioritising a 2nd pilot to the point we end up lagging behind about 8~10 years (and increasing) behind the PLAAF, which is where we currently are imo?

The goal behind the two-seat is just drone control and battlespace management in a smaller complement of 2 or 3 squadrons. It's 'cause the IAF doesn't plan to push for two-seat versions of LCA Mk2 and AMCA, so the Su-60, if you will, can provide mature battlespace management capabilities until our drone programs mature fully.

 

[DerBerserker]

The MKI tracking the J-20 came from ACM Dhanoa during Gaganshakti. But what he meant was the J-20 is not stealthy enough to defeat even an old fighter radar. "Even MKI can track it." And that only true stealth jets are Neuron and B-2. Point being 5th gen stealth with vertical fins and powerful engines do not qualify as stealth jets. He even pointed out that FGFA is more stealthy than the J-20.

He also said Rafale with Meteor will easily defeat the J-20, ie, the Meteor's seeker can spot the J-20's canards while maneuvering.

This is consistent with Western evaluations of the J-20 too.

CCTV too revealed that the J-35's palm-sized RCS is Western class and much smaller than the J-20, which puts it in the same RCS class as a golf ball.

That would mean the J-20's RCS is marginally better than the Rafale's clean frontal RCS (0.04-0.08 m2), which the Rafale can artificially reduce by 100 more times, marble size, or 10 times with weapons, ie, golf ball size.

Oh yes I've heard, I've also read the CAC's paper on Canards on 5th gens and how they affect stealth performance. The J-35 is inherently a much stealthier design. The J-20A/S though are the ones I'd be more concerned about. And as for the METEOR's onboard seeker, if it can see it, DRDO's Ku Mechanical and AESA missile seekers definitely can too. The Su-57's RCS is also likely a fair bit lower than what people assume, since when they refer to the patent, I believe its talking about average RCS, not its absolute minimum. Additionally we probably won't know what they'd have material technology-wise, though I'd say its safe to assume its an order of magnitude less detectable than the J-20 is.

 

[lmaoxd]

The MKI tracking the J-20 came from ACM Dhanoa during Gaganshakti. But what he meant was the J-20 is not stealthy enough to defeat even an old fighter radar. "Even MKI can track it." And that only true stealth jets are Neuron and B-2. Point being 5th gen stealth with vertical fins and powerful engines do not qualify as stealth jets. He even pointed out that FGFA is more stealthy than the J-20.

He also said Rafale with Meteor will easily defeat the J-20, ie, the Meteor's seeker can spot the J-20's canards while maneuvering.

This is consistent with Western evaluations of the J-20 too.

CCTV too revealed that the J-35's palm-sized RCS is Western class and much smaller than the J-20, which puts it in the same RCS class as a golf ball.

That would mean the J-20's RCS is marginally better than the Rafale's clean frontal RCS (0.04-0.08 m2), which the Rafale can artificially reduce by 100 more times, marble size, or 10 times with weapons, ie, golf ball size.

artificla reduction doesnt work in the mordern world with high bandwidth AESA radars. would have worked somehwta back in the 2000s and earyl 2010s but not in the 2020s and especially not 2030s. the rafale is for all practical purposes a 1sqm class jet with weapons loaded. the su30 is a 10 sqm class jet.

 

[randomradio]

Additionally, there are doubts being raised about the actual stealthiness of the J-20 now. Add to that (what I surmise to be) the intended design purpose of the airframe, and the J-20 isn't an untouchable aircraft like the F-22 is, at the ranges we would encounter it at - it just needs to be handled differently. As for Shigatse, its well within the range of Indian munitions. Disabling their runways are, as I said, an easy way to level the playing field rapidly. The real problem would be evading the domestic long range Chinese SAMs, for which again, the Rafale (in this case) when over friendly territory is likely more than capable of doing.

The Chinese have matched India's Rafale presence with J-20s. They have a squadron in Hotan and another in Shigatse. The ones in Hotan can perform at almost peak efficiency.

Yeah, both air bases are within striking distance of India's SRBMs.

A drawback of Chinese air defenses is they lack sufficient coverage over Tibet. It's possible they will fix that before going to war with India though. What doesn't work in China's favor is while India's air defenses are more dense, the Chinese have the disadvantage of having placed all their critical logistics hubs within striking range of SRBMs, artillery, and interdiction jets like LCA. I guess it was all inherited from the 60s.

And as big as Tibet is, more than 70% of the land has permafrost under it, and it's melting. One of their main highways connecting Lhasa to Qinghai is already deforming. So there's risk to further developing Tibet with military infrastructure.

 

[lmaoxd]

The interim engines only boost thrust by another 15%. It's pointless beyond just zipping around at mach 1.6 while Rafale can do mach 1.4.

You would be paying $30-40B or even $10B for a capability that adds practically nothing to the IAF. In the end you still have limited stealth and underpowered avionics.

And don't trust the snake oil merchants claiming an AL-31F derived engine is 5th gen just 'cause it delivers more thrust. Izd 30 is the minimum necessary to make Su-57 a true stealth jet or else it is even less than Rafale F4.

The Koreans don't claim KF-21 B1/B2 is a stealth jet anyway. Their goal is to get an incrementally better Typhoon using the F414. B2 is just the FOC version of B1. Their stealth version is called KF-21 B3 and is expected to get a 5th gen engine.



It would depend on where you stand concerning its standing as a stealth jet relative to the Rafale.

The Rafale has showed off capabilities in Sindoor that only stealth jets can do. And Dassault officials are on record claiming the Rafale's RCS is that of a sparrow. Picdel is a source too, considering he was number 4 in Dassault and his clearance is the highest possible in France. He's worked on/was in charge of anti-submarine (Atlantique), space (Galileo), and nuclear programs (Laser Megajoule) too. He also ran/supported France's nuclear chain of command.

If someone with his credentials claims Rafale is stealthy, I don't see any reason to doubt it. Plus the IAF will verify that claim anyway.

Picdel's junior, a VP in Dassault, publicly claimed the Rafale's frontal RCS is that of a sparrow in a documentary. And Picdel claims while Rafale's clean RCS is 0.0001m2 class, it drops down to 0.01-0.001m2 depending on the payload + some physical limitations he wouldn't reveal. And that this type of stealth is upgradeable.

CSIR-NAL agrees with that assessment too. My post regarding that...

Post in thread 'Indian AESA Radar Developments'

Mar 14, 2026

More on active cancelation fro CSIR-NAL.



What all those words mean:


The conclusion they reached.



And now, they are working on active cancelation for incorporation into Indian aircraft. AMCA, TEDBF, Ghatak, and LCA Mk2, all 4 can be equipped with it.

And this bit is very, very important.
"As compared to passive cancellation of scattered power, active RCS reduction is more feasible and practical as it requires less power, and has got cost-effective advantages."

What it means is active cancelation is easier than shaping-based stealth. That's...

• randomradio

• 
• 

Combine stealth with next gen avionics, weapons, and flight performance, like supercruise, you can see why the IAF prefers Rafale over everything else.

@Jarvis @lmaoxd



The goal behind the two-seat is just drone control and battlespace management in a smaller complement of 2 or 3 squadrons. It's 'cause the IAF doesn't plan to push for two-seat versions of LCA Mk2 and AMCA, so the Su-60, if you will, can provide mature battlespace management capabilities until our drone programs mature fully.

No. the rafales frontal is not 0.01m^2 . its around 0.1-0.25m^2. with weapons it goes upto 1.25ish msq. common sense will tell us that fact regarless of marketing claims. Active RCS reduction is real but it has very limited performance vs high end PESAs and AESAs. good vs mechanical and early PESAs.

 

[DerBerserker]

And don't trust the snake oil merchants claiming an AL-31F derived engine is 5th gen just 'cause it delivers more thrust. Izd 30 is the minimum necessary to make Su-57 a true stealth jet or else it is even less than Rafale F4.

Well of course I'm not saying the 41F1S is a proper 5th gen engine, its a marginally upgraded AL-31F after all. I'm just saying its good enough as an interim option. It has heavily upgraded its electrical generation capabilities in order to support the Sh-121 MIRES iirc.

The Koreans don't claim KF-21 B1/B2 is a stealth jet anyway. Their goal is to get an incrementally better Typhoon using the F414. B2 is just the FOC version of B1. Their stealth version is called KF-21 B3 and is expected to get a 5th gen engine.

I've heard about it, yeah, but I do think the possibility for them to use the F414 is still extant, if need be (at least for prototyping, though I'm not quite aware as to how their indigenous engine programme is progressing).

The goal behind the two-seat is just drone control and battlespace management in a smaller complement of 2 or 3 squadrons. It's 'cause the IAF doesn't plan to push for two-seat versions of LCA Mk2 and AMCA, so the Su-60, if you will, can provide mature battlespace management capabilities until our drone programs mature fully.

Well yes, that and reducing the operational load on a single pilot. If memory serves me right, during Desert Storm twin seater aircraft performed significantly better than single seaters.

It would depend on where you stand concerning its standing as a stealth jet relative to the Rafale.

The Rafale has showed off capabilities in Sindoor that only stealth jets can do. And Dassault officials are on record claiming the Rafale's RCS is that of a sparrow. Picdel is a source too, considering he was number 4 in Dassault and his clearance is the highest possible in France. He's worked on/was in charge of anti-submarine (Atlantique), space (Galileo), and nuclear programs (Laser Megajoule) too. He also ran/supported France's nuclear chain of command.

If someone with his credentials claims Rafale is stealthy, I don't see any reason to doubt it. Plus the IAF will verify that claim anyway.

Picdel's junior, a VP in Dassault, publicly claimed the Rafale's frontal RCS is that of a sparrow in a documentary. And Picdel claims while Rafale's clean RCS is 0.0001m2 class, it drops down to 0.01-0.001m2 depending on the payload + some physical limitations he wouldn't reveal. And that this type of stealth is upgradeable.

I believe the Rafale with weapons is still extremely formidable, and as you said it has probably the lowest RCS of any non 5th Gen out there, but to what extent it's marketing and to what extent they're being truthful, does come into question. A Su-57 will almost invariably have a lower RCS than a clean Rafale, and the gap will only get wider from there. Them claiming 0.0001m2 when clean seems to be a rather large stretch, that'd put it up with the F-22, and it really is reminiscent of the whole 'Rafale winning against the F-22' without any other context.

And regarding the active cancellation and so on, the low profile RF antennae and the progress I've seen on other things like indigenous RAM and JAs are some great stuff. I hope we get to see them on our own aircraft rather quickly.

 

[randomradio]

No. the rafales frontal is not 0.01m^2 . its around 0.1-0.25m^2. with weapons it goes upto 1.25ish msq. common sense will tell us that fact regarless of marketing claims. Active RCS reduction is real but it has very limited performance vs high end PESAs and AESAs. good vs mechanical and early PESAs.

Passive RCS is 10-20 times smaller than the M2000's 0.8m2. That's 0.04-0.08m2. Rafale has been designed ground-up for RO capability. The sawtooth patterns all over the airframe and control surfaces are proof of that.

Active cancelation has no relevance to the type of antenna used. All the cancelation signal requires is faster processing compared to the hostile radar and knowledge of its own RCS from all aspects. All it does is insert an out-of-phase echo into the hostile radar's signal without any signal processing of the hostile signal itself, so it's real time. It's designed to work on AESA radars.

The paper I posted also claims "phased arrays."

 

[DerBerserker]

Passive RCS is 10-20 times smaller than the M2000's 0.8m2. That's 0.04-0.08m2. Rafale has been designed ground-up for RO capability. The sawtooth patterns all over the airframe and control surfaces are proof of that.

Active cancelation has no relevance to the type of antenna used. All the cancelation signal requires is faster processing compared to the hostile radar and knowledge of its own RCS from all aspects. All it does is insert an out-of-phase echo into the hostile radar's signal without any signal processing of the hostile signal itself, so it's real time. It's designed to work on AESA radars.

The paper I posted also claims "phased arrays."

I'm not just talking about the Active cancellation bit there, I was just continuing the conversation in the same vein. I am aware about how destructive interference works, and JAs I mentioned do that too AFAIK. As for the low profile RF antennae, they could be used for the same purpose you've mentioned (since it would conceptually be quite similar to technologies like DRFM).

 

[randomradio]

Well of course I'm not saying the 41F1S is a proper 5th gen engine, its a marginally upgraded AL-31F after all. I'm just saying its good enough as an interim option. It has heavily upgraded its electrical generation capabilities in order to support the Sh-121 MIRES iirc.

117 isn't the interim engine in question, they have a new one called 177 which spits out 160 kN of thrust. The problem is it's still a derivative of the AL-31FP, which is nothing special. Russia's export-grade EW suite is trash. They don't give away their own stuff. that's also why export customers are allowed to replace it with Western stuff. The Malaysians use a Swedish one on MKM.

I've heard about it, yeah, but I do think the possibility for them to use the F414 is still extant, if need be (at least for prototyping, though I'm not quite aware as to how their indigenous engine programme is progressing).

They wanna do things on their own.

147, 148.

Post in thread 'South Korean KAI KF-21 Boramae Developments'

Apr 13, 2026

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043546890718089258

@randomradio

They locally manufacture F414 with 50% ToT for B1 and 2.

B3 is an AMCA-class design and they need a new engine for it. It will be an indigenous design.

It's unclear if they will rely on foreign raw material suppliers for the hot core along with cooling tech. Doosan have nickel SX for vanes and turbine blades that manage 1900+K already. The B3's engine needs to be able to handle 2000-2100K at the minimum.

KIMS, their Midhani, recently signed a ToT with Hanwha for a new SX superalloy that they claim is rhenium-free...

• randomradio

• 

Well yes, that and reducing the operational load on a single pilot. If memory serves me right, during Desert Storm twin seater aircraft performed significantly better than single seaters.

To be fair, that's what twin-seats were designed for back then. F-4 and F-16 Wild Weasels were twin-seat. F-15E as well. Whereas single-seat F-15C was A2A only. F-111 was also twin-seat.

I believe the Rafale with weapons is still extremely formidable, and as you said it has probably the lowest RCS of any non 5th Gen out there, but to what extent it's marketing and to what extent they're being truthful, does come into question. A Su-57 will almost invariably have a lower RCS than a clean Rafale, and the gap will only get wider from there. Them claiming 0.0001m2 when clean seems to be a rather large stretch, that'd put it up with the F-22, and it really is reminiscent of the whole 'Rafale winning against the F-22' without any other context.

And regarding the active cancellation and so on, the low profile RF antennae and the progress I've seen on other things like indigenous RAM and JAs are some great stuff. I hope we get to see them on our own aircraft rather quickly.

Su-57 in its current avatar, even the M1, are not stealthy enough to meet the IAF's standards. They are sufficient for Russia's, as the primary goal is long range fires while operating over their own air defenses, the same as J-20 for China. Russia doesn't need an ASF that works in contested airspace. They will have other variants for that purpose while being supported by stealth drones.

 

[DerBerserker]

117 isn't the interim engine in question, they have a new one called 117 which spits out 160 kN of thrust. The problem is it's still a derivative of the AL-31FP, which is nothing special. Russia's export-grade EW suite is trash. They don't give away their own stuff. that's also why export customers are allowed to replace it with Western stuff. The Malaysians use a Swedish one on MKM.



They wanna do things on their own.

147, 148.

Post in thread 'South Korean KAI KF-21 Boramae Developments'

Apr 13, 2026

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043546890718089258

@randomradio

They locally manufacture F414 with 50% ToT for B1 and 2.

B3 is an AMCA-class design and they need a new engine for it. It will be an indigenous design.

It's unclear if they will rely on foreign raw material suppliers for the hot core along with cooling tech. Doosan have nickel SX for vanes and turbine blades that manage 1900+K already. The B3's engine needs to be able to handle 2000-2100K at the minimum.

KIMS, their Midhani, recently signed a ToT with Hanwha for a new SX superalloy that they claim is rhenium-free...

• randomradio

• 

To be fair, that's what twin-seats were designed for back then. F-4 and F-16 Wild Weasels were twin-seat. F-15E as well. Whereas single-seat F-15C was A2A only. F-111 was also twin-seat.



Su-57 in its current avatar, even the M1, are not stealthy enough to meet the IAF's standards. They are sufficient for Russia's, as the primary goal is long range fires while operating over their own air defenses, the same as J-20 for China. Russia doesn't need an ASF that works in contested airspace. They will have other variants for that purpose while being supported by stealth drones.

Ah I wrote 41F1S, sorry, that's on me. The Su-57 uses the AL-41F1 atm and the 41F1S is used on the Su-35. As for the Russian export EW suite, that's quite obvious, I'd imagine India would replace a lot of Russian systems with indigenous ones on the Felons. The 30MKM uses equipment from Thales, Avitronics, and SAAB afaik, and I don't imagine that India wouldn't swap out many of their systems with our own (I wonder if they'd give us the 101KS Atoll though).

I feel like the Su-57 would still be sufficient if would be primarily used in the BVR role, where stealth matters a whole lot more than it does in other combat regimes. In a long range A2A engagement, the 57 would definitely do well especially when networked with other aircraft. It does have a significant advantage due to its leading edge L-Band arrays allowing it to detect stealth targets pretty early on, with some element of data fusion, I think it could definitely take on the J-20. I believe India has been offered the S-70 Okhotnik too? Though we may just end up going with an indigenous option though I think the S-70 would be a good solution for now.

 

[randomradio]

117 isn't the interim engine in question, they have a new one called 117 which spits out 160 kN of thrust.

Correction: 177.

 

[randomradio]

Ah I wrote 41F1S, sorry, that's on me. The Su-57 uses the AL-41F1 atm and the 41F1S is used on the Su-35. As for the Russian export EW suite, that's quite obvious, I'd imagine India would replace a lot of Russian systems with indigenous ones on the Felons. The 30MKM uses equipment from Thales, Avitronics, and SAAB afaik, and I don't imagine that India wouldn't swap out many of their systems with our own (I wonder if they'd give us the 101KS Atoll though).

The Russians will provide the same hardware but a different software. We will likely choose to replace that too, if we are serious about MKIzation.

I feel like the Su-57 would still be sufficient if would be primarily used in the BVR role, where stealth matters a whole lot more than it does in other combat regimes. In a long range A2A engagement, the 57 would definitely do well especially when networked with other aircraft. It does have a significant advantage due to its leading edge L-Band arrays allowing it to detect stealth targets pretty early on, with some element of data fusion, I think it could definitely take on the J-20. I believe India has been offered the S-70 Okhotnik too? Though we may just end up going with an indigenous option though I think the S-70 would be a good solution for now.

It's not worth the billions in spending versus investing on 6th gen within the same timeframe.

The Su-57M1 seems to be stuck with 177. They are pushing this engine to the IAF too, which they definitely will not bite. And the twin-seat is expected to fly soon, but will take 4 years for certification followed by 3 years of MKIzation and 3 years of production. So 2037 for an operational jet, the same time it will take GCAP to enter IAF service. Or around 2034-35 for a direct import. The Americans and Europeans will definitely offer an alternative to the Su-60 by then, even if we don't enter their development programs.

S-70 can also be MKIzed alongside Su-60, but we need a more advanced variant.

 

[DerBerserker]

Correction: 177.

The planned engine on the Su-57 is the Izdeliye 30, the AL-51F1 (which produces 177kN of thrust). The derivative engine made from Izd. 30 is the Project 177S, which is a combination of the AL-51F1 and the AL-41F1. That is the engine which can replace the AL-31Fs on the Flanker-H, Flanker-M, and Fullbacks. This will also be, in all likeliness, the engine an export 57M1E will have.