- Dec 3, 2017
Just thinking out loud.
Would you then want large numbers of such point defence fighters that would focus on interception albeit being multirole, or would you rather have large number of air superiority/strike role aircraft that can take the fight to the enemy airspace?
Given the current fleet, would you focus on increasing MKI/Rafale/ORCA type fighters or should we focus on single-engine mk1A/Mk2/MWF type single-engine fighters?
Or neither of the two options and wait it out for the 5th gen developments/offerings instead of chasing numbers?
I think jsf won't come but we could very well have the su 57 as a replacement since amca will take atleast 2030 to come online by that time we wil have a 200-300 J-20 fleet with the Chinese atleast.Put the nail in the coffin of the Jags and let them RIP.
My wish list.
2030 time frame
> With the current 13 Sqdns of MKI (including TACDE) 3 additional Sqdns (15 sqdns)
> With the current squadron 3 squadrons of M29 additional 2 squadrons, with a Phazatron Zhuk Aesa radar. (5)
>M2k Current fleet (2 sqdns)
>Tejas LCA 1P (2 sqdns)
>Tejas MWF (6sqdns)
>Rafale current 2 + 6 Sqdns as part of MRFA
> F35 JSF 4 sqdns.
42 sqdns total
replace 5 Mig29 sqds with AMCA and + 3 sqdns
Replace 2 m2k sqds with ORCA and additional 3 sqdns
Additional 4 Sqdns of F35 JSF
Total 52 sqdns.
The mig 31 was primarily designed as a interceptor. There's no other equivalent to the mig 31. The f15C is similar in design but it's more closer to the su27/30 than the mig 31 in terms of roles. Sure It can do a job of a interceptor but it's not a dedicated one like the mig 31. And mig 31 might be the last of its kind to fit that role...Tell this to a twin engine Mig31. I mean interception time not maintanence.
Everything you said was well put.
My only objection "A lot of people do not know that the IAF is actually an extremely forward-thinking air force."
The mig 31 was primarily designed as a interceptor. There's no other equivalent to the mig 31. The f15C is similar in design but it's more closer to the su27/30 than the mig 31 in terms of roles. Sure It can do a job of a interceptor but it's not a dedicated one like the mig 31. And mig 31 might be the last of its kind to fit that role...
We have a large Navy, with 3-5 sqns of MKI's in the dedicated maritime role will be big insurance for the Navy. In maritime role with it's exceptional anti-shipping qualified ordnance, even a naval fleet that is overwhelmingly bigger than ours can be kept on their toes.
For gaining a full air superiority over the western front we will have to take losses. Accounting for that, MKI numbers are important.
Sure , but I say more MWF the better.
I have a feeling that in the next decade F35 will be on offer, and IAF will lap it up.
It could have gone different and I feel we need to integrate the r37m on the mki. Though I feel the results wouldn't have changed since it was a case of RoE than just capability. The f16's had the element of surprise and it was plain theatrics from their side. Their plan was to bait a fighter inside Pakistani airspace so it was successful but they lost an f-16 in the process so it kind of shows that the PAF didn't achieve jackshit. They could barely even enter our airspace. The only failure was of the mi-17 fratricide that happened. If our mig 21 could enter enemy airspace and take out there fighter it just shows how vulnerable the PAF is. If an actual extended battle took place the PAF will be further pushed back. Even with our current inventory we can ground the PAF fleet. Once Astra becomes fleet wide available it will only make it more difficult for the PAF to put up a fight. The pl-15 still hasn't come. There jf 17's sd-10's have an inferior range to our older r77's which had lesser range. Forget the rvv-ae and all the newer missiles.Despite the smaller budget than at the time of the Soviet Union, the Russian Air Force has invested in new aircraft programs such as the ...www.airway1.com
If we had mig31 on that awful day, things would have been different. PAF would definitely loose two AEWs on that day
IAF planned for the MKI in 2000, Rafale in the 2010s, FGFA in the 2020s and AMCA in the 2030s. That's unmatched by anyone else. Each decade brought in a major technological improvement in the IAF's ability to wage war. Now if you consider the 2040s would bring in FCAS and 2050 would bring in AMCA's next indigenous successor, we would have 6 generations of aircraft in a span of 5 decades, with at least 4 within 3 decades as practically assured. Each jet being comprehensively superior to the earlier one. Most other air forces would only have 2 aircraft generations within that time. We would actually have to replace "generation" with "cycle" by then.
45696 cr for 83 a/c's,
So 76.465 Million per a/c... (at 72rs per usd)
Is it just me or is that a tad bit expensive for LCA?
Same Manufacturer offers MKI's for 54 million USD? how do we reconcile that?Has to do with Indian economy not trading/integrating enough with relevant sectors of world economy (these last 10 - 20 years etc)...more than anything else...and not having a large surplus + Cur.A-driven forex pile.
The demand and supply of USD w.r.t INR is not broad enough and deep enough basically (especially for manufacturing + electronic sector)...so the narrow scope it is valued on (w.r.t both economies and world economy) is not adequate for lot of capital intensive things especially.
i.e USD exchange rate is not a good price reference conversion in India's case for this kind of top tier+low production run Multi-assembly manufactured thing (esp with comparison of other countries prices for systems that are far more integrated/developed in trade).
Indian labour and supply side is effectively overpriced (in USD) compared to INR's internal price reference and inflation.
You see something similar happen with the ridiculous paying through the nose and everything else (seemingly) with what KSA and gulfies fork out for US and western defence imports. Again they are integrated very poorly in the broad seam referencing (its just oil in their case) to dictate the "true" adequate value for their currency.