MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[randomradio]

I do believe the Rafales in IAF service will see 2 rounds of comprehensive upgrades, over an operational lifespan of, say, 45-50yrs (a bit like how M2K & MiG-29 will see around 50yrs service life in IAF). The 1st one between 2035-40, when the F5-spec Rafale starts entering the French service. The 2nd one sometime around 2050, which I think will last it till the end of its life. The IN Rafales will follow a similar pattern too.

The F3R MLU is in the 2040s, IOC expected after the 30th year.

M2000 was the same. Inducted in 1985, MLU'd between 2015-24. In 2024, we are planning on inducting the very last few jets. And we will operate them until 2042-45. That's 50 years. There is no second upgrade.

IN Rafales cannot match the timeline of IAF Rafales due to its shorter life and the punishing nature of the sea; 6500 hours vs 8000 hours. So the MLU process is much faster.

Mig-29 has just 2500 hours lifespan, its upgrade options are different because it needs a second SLEP to operate up to 2042. Old Russian stuff has poor lifespan, including avionics like the radar.

As for large fleets like MKI and MRFA, the jets are inducted in one standard, but will receive batchwise upgrades during MLU. If MRFA is inducted really quickly, say, 24 jets a year, then it could end up with just 1 standard during MLU, 'cause it will take just 5 years to deliver all 114 and an equal time to upgrade all, so there's no time for a new standard.

 

[randomradio]

In the Chinese forum, we rarely read these subjective reports, we will calculate the thrust-weight ratio, wing load, lift-drag ratio and other data to evaluate the aircraft, as for the development process of tejas, the relevant information has been a lot, there is no need for you to promote false information here
Did any Malaysian media say they were more interested in Tejas?

That's what the Malaysian Defense Minister Mohamad Hasan said in the Malaysian parliament.

LCA won both the tech round and was cheaper than FA-50, but FA-50 was chosen because of its "service record." He said he didn't want RMAF to be in a "laboratory test." Do you really think Malaysian opposition will not be curious about the govt's choice when they picked an obviously inferior jet?

You can discuss TWR, wing loading, lift-drag etc all you want, but you need to have real data for it.

 

[randomradio]

At the time I thought your Rafales were pre-wired for F4.2 which was the first standard not compatible with the previous ones. Now the first non-compatible standard is F5, which may be a little different from the earlier F4.2, but the pre-wiring should still be suitable, at least I hope so.

MMRCA version was pre-F3R. GTG was F3R.

 

[_Anonymous_]

So we're being told the MMRCA was junked because it wasn't obsolescence proof & future upgrades if any would deviate from the standard ones , be inferior & cost a bomb .

Not because Dassault had refused to honour previous commitments about guaranteeing product quality over which they had no oversight & the timelines taken for the delivery which given HAL is less automated than similar Dassault factories would automatically have resulted in longer man hours.

And all this was the result of that brilliant tender drawn up by the equally brilliant Matheswaran "Principal Director of Air Staff Requirements" also functioning as Commandant of the ASTE , the "expert" among experts who was literally the last word on the MMRCA who had the ear of the ACM himself with an internet chump here now completely undermining him & his reputation after raising it sky high.

Right before our eyes the entire history of the MMRCA is being subverted & the young ones here who don't know anything better not having been present then when the entire saga was unfolding would literally take this as the gospel coz others here who were present then & know facts from narratives being peddled are either too lazy or too disinclined to set the record straight.

Can't tell how does a forum permit BS like this daily on the scale that it does .

Sorely tempted to link that little IG post of a young baby " playing" with his dog again & the write up accompanying it .

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

MMRCA version was pre-F3R. GTG was F3R.

GTG was F3R + ISE : There was additional equipment such as wider bandwidths upwards and downwards for SPECTRA with jammers in the tail of the towed jammers which involved point 3 cabling etc... At the time, the definition of F4.2 had been finalised and the cabling had to be modified, so it didn't cost any more to install cabling that was F4.2 + ISE compatible than cabling that was only ISE compatible. So I think we proposed the most advanced cabling to the IAF.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Whatever is part of F4.3 will not be replaced with F5 subsystems. If something's missing, that can be added, but existing subsystems won't be replaced until MLU. Only obsolete equipment can be replaced if necessary, but I don't think Rafale's going to be carrying anything that will be obsolete for many decades.

For example, if RBE2 AESA and XG are very different from each other, then the IN won't replace the older radar with the new one. At best the GaAs TRMs can be exchanged with GaN at the end of their lives, if that's possible. Like your PESA to AESA retrofit. However drone functionality and all of its related hardware missing on F4.3 can be added once F5 is ready.

In fact, the initial decision was not to retrofit the PESA antennas with AESA antennas, but in the end we took advantage of the fact that the antennas are plug and play between AESA and PESA and we bought 50 extra when we sold the second-hand Rafales to Croatia, and in addition we sold 24 second-hand Rafales, making 74 replacements. As for the GaN, the main antenna will be plug and play. we will be able to take back AESA antennas to finish off PESA replacements and sell you AESA GaN antennas.

 

[Speedster1]

RAF was fine with Tranch 1 because that was the expectation. But what ADA did was tried pushing Tranche 0.5 in the name of all that you said. Hence the three-legged comment.

Before the late Manohar Parrikar came along, the IAF was just about ready to wash its hands of the LCA Mk1. This was around the time key elements like MMR were showing the first signs of success.

This is an ac designed in the 1980s and still is a decent ASF, leagues better than the outgoing M21. A scathing term 'three legged' was not warranted for a home-grown ac, imo. They wouldn't dream of saying that about a foreign ac.

Then the IAF made sure the FOC version was completely up to spec before delivery

Yet, they inducted the Su-30K which was nowhere close to IAF requirements 'as is' and went on to sign for 140 MKIs based on nothing but assurances from Sukhoi DB (we know how that has panned out for us with projects like INS Vikramaditya).

AM Philip Rajkumar who worked alongside the LCA team in the 1990s says in his book that pending issues could have been resolved post induction.

To push under-spec LCA on to the IAF after they were forced to delink Kaveri by the MoD. So everything had to be redone, this time with F404.

The basic airframe was well proven by that time and with a 100% flight safety record. There was no risk to flight crew that would have precluded induction, imo.

The Bison team still studied the progress of the LCA and presented their finds to the IAF Chief along with a whole bunch of top officers, to show them why the Bison upgrade was a good idea.

Not aware of this episode but it's not as if the IAF had been denied access to the ac.

Until then, the IAF had no clue about the LCA's progress

AM Rajkumar was associated with the LCA project since the early 1990s.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Before the late Manohar Parrikar came along, the IAF was just about ready to wash its hands of the LCA Mk1. This was around the time key elements like MMR were showing the first signs of success.

This is an ac designed in the 1980s and still is a decent ASF, leagues better than the outgoing M21. A scathing term 'three legged' was not warranted for a home-grown ac, imo. They wouldn't dream of saying that about a foreign ac.


Yet, they inducted the Su-30K which was nowhere close to IAF requirements 'as is' and went on to sign for 140 MKIs based on nothing but assurances from Sukhoi DB (we know how that has panned out for us with projects like INS Vikramaditya).

AM Philip Rajkumar who worked alongside the LCA team in the 1990s says in his book that pending issues could have been resolved post induction.


The basic airframe was well proven by that time and with a 100% flight safety record. There was no risk to flight crew that would have precluded induction, imo.


Not aware of this episode but it's not as if the IAF had been denied access to the ac.



AM Rajkumar was associated with the LCA project since the early 1990s.

Bygones be bygones, IAF now loves Tejas. They'll love MK2 even more. In fact, the new ACM categorically said that MK2 would be on par with (current) Rafale in capability. I said sometime back that we should procure over 200 MK1/A and 200+ MK2 for which I got plenty of flak. But in the end my prediction has come true.

Now coming to the topic of MRFA. Well! Americans are desperate for us to buy F-35s. They are dangling it to us by bringing it into subsequent Aero India shows(24 & 25). But first they want IAF to operate F-16Vs err.......F-21s.

As for France, reportedly Mr. Doval had very good talk with them regarding future Indo-French defense deals. So, still we could end up with three digit Rafale fleet.

Rafale F5 vs F-35 Block 4 has been my guess/wish for long. Let's see, who wins it in the end.

 

[YoungWolf]

Bygones be bygones, IAF now loves Tejas. They'll love MK2 even more. In fact, the new ACM categorically said that MK2 would be on par with (current) Rafale in capability. I said sometime back that we should procure over 200 MK1/A and 200+ MK2 for which I got plenty of flak. But in the end my prediction has come true.

Now coming to the topic of MRFA. Well! Americans are desperate for us to buy F-35s. They are dangling it to us by bringing it into subsequent Aero India shows(24 & 25). But first they want IAF to operate F-16Vs err.......F-21s.

As for France, reportedly Mr. Doval had very good talk with them regarding future Indo-French defense deals. So, still we could end up with three digit Rafale fleet.

Rafale F5 vs F-35 Block 4 has been my guess/wish for long. Let's see, who wins it in the end.

F-35 won't wear the IAF roundel as like you said (and everyone knows), the US wants us to operate the F-16s first which the IAF will never do, so the entire point of possible F-35 sale to India becomes moot. It's Rafale (F5 or whatever) or bust for MRFA. Like it happened previously, the Typhoon will be the closest competitor and the remaining contenders will just receive a pat in the back for participation in the tender.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Bygones be bygones, IAF now loves Tejas. They'll love MK2 even more. In fact, the new ACM categorically said that MK2 would be on par with (current) Rafale in capability. I said sometime back that we should procure over 200 MK1/A and 200+ MK2 for which I got plenty of flak. But in the end my prediction has come true.

Now coming to the topic of MRFA. Well! Americans are desperate for us to buy F-35s. They are dangling it to us by bringing it into subsequent Aero India shows(24 & 25). But first they want IAF to operate F-16Vs err.......F-21s.

As for France, reportedly Mr. Doval had very good talk with them regarding future Indo-French defense deals. So, still we could end up with three digit Rafale fleet.

Rafale F5 vs F-35 Block 4 has been my guess/wish for long. Let's see, who wins it in the end.

You must be aware that we are trying to get Engine Technology for 110 KN Engine for AMCA MK 2

That itself is holding up the MRFA deal ie we have Linked the 2 deals

And while we have tried our luck with 3 manufacturers ie Safran
Rolls Royce and GE, There is still No clarity about the way forward

 

[randomradio]

GTG was F3R + ISE : There was additional equipment such as wider bandwidths upwards and downwards for SPECTRA with jammers in the tail of the towed jammers which involved point 3 cabling etc... At the time, the definition of F4.2 had been finalised and the cabling had to be modified, so it didn't cost any more to install cabling that was F4.2 + ISE compatible than cabling that was only ISE compatible. So I think we proposed the most advanced cabling to the IAF.

The version finally delivered to the IAF is future ready. But I was referring to MMRCA model chosen for local production, it was the F3.4, with ISE of course, but that model wasn't future ready.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

The version finally delivered to the IAF is future ready. But I was referring to MMRCA model chosen for local production, it was the F3.4, with ISE of course, but that model wasn't future ready.

At the moment F4.1 is delivered, so we're in the process of doing the F4.2 manufacturers' tests, which means that the equipment are ready, the tests may slightly modify the software to optimise the results or to correct bugs in twisted cases that only occur during flight testing. If you sign now, it will take a year to build your manufacturing plant, so we'll start building 12 aircraft at Mérignac so that the first one can be delivered to you in 2027: there's no problem with these aircraft being delivered in F4.2, then the first Indian-built aircraft will come out in 2028 and again there's no reason why we should have problems delivering it in F4.2. I think that in India the aircraft will be produced at a rate of 2 per month, i.e. 24 per year, so production will be finished in 2033, and there again there's no problem in retrofitting them to F4.3. Having been delivered in F4.2, these aircraft will have a radar with the new receiver, so they can be upgraded to RBE2 XG by adding multifunction GaN antennas, which will create a 360° bubble.

 

[randomradio]

Man, what a dumb post by Ignorants. Prefect example for the application of the a** and elbow idiom. And damn, I forgot about the other thread, probably 'cause how nonsensical the discussion was.

IAF's previous doctrine was released in 2007 followed by a new one in 2022 and our procurement plan matches these two doctrinal changes.

There's nothing wrong with Matheswaran's MMRCA, the same thing has been pushed for MRFA as well, only the weightage towards specific technologies has changed.

It was a Rafale/Typhoon problem, both jets being the best of a previous generation and not suitable for the next gen fight.

4th gen began in the 70s and 80s and culminated into its best version in the form of Rafale/Typhoon by 2018 and 2021 (F3R and Tranche 3A) resply. We just had the honor of being unlucky enough to almost sign up for the version just behind the best 4.5th gen jet (F3R vs F3.4).

And now MRFA was delayed to the point we can actually introduce 6th gen tech via Rafale F5. Naturally, other competitors would have cooked up something similar to offer within that timeframe. So we are now entering 6th gen instead of getting stuck with a whole lot of 4.5th gen aircraft with no real future. In the meantime, 36 Rafale F3R, LCA Mk1A and LCA Mk2 will bridge the gap with peak 4.5th and early 5th gen tech.

I had always said that to fight the J-20 and other next gen Chinese jets, we will need a Rafale configuration that's the same as what's coming with F5, and that F4 and below are not suitable for that role. Funny how people tend to forget this.

Now one could argue that MMRCA would have delivered in 2018 and we could have taken F5 deliveries after 2035, even if it's for a small number. That's a decent 20 years right? And that's the problem. We would have paid a huge amount for what's clearly a 4.5th gen jet, locked that budget up for only a temporary superiority, and lost that very quickly, we have already reached that point, and then get stuck with almost 200 inadequate jets that would have been surpassed by LCA Mk2 by 2030 with GaN tech, and then pay an equally large amount to inadequately upgrade the now old Rafales to a lower standard than what would be normal for its time; ie, the F5/F6, when the same old jet would be in the process of being phased out of French service. We were headed for a ridiculous situation, no different from how Russian Flankers are now half a generation ahead of the MKI. We were lucky enough to escape this trap.

Instead, Parrikar killed MMRCA, and what he did was plug some of the gap with 36 Rafales to achieve deterrence, continuing our defensive posture against China, and invested the rest of the money for the next gen fight, like an IADS, force multipliers, a new space plan, BMD, base infrastructure and indigenous fighters.

Another important point to note is Modi went behind Parrikar's back to begin the GTG deal in parallel for a new version of the Rafale, so the IAF was already dealing with MMRCA's obsolescence even before it was signed. I guess China's advancements have come as a surprise to everyone. There should be at least 2 J-XXs in development right now, successors to the J-10 and J-16, so that means Rafale F5 or bust.

 

[randomradio]

Before the late Manohar Parrikar came along, the IAF was just about ready to wash its hands of the LCA Mk1. This was around the time key elements like MMR were showing the first signs of success.

This is an ac designed in the 1980s and still is a decent ASF, leagues better than the outgoing M21. A scathing term 'three legged' was not warranted for a home-grown ac, imo. They wouldn't dream of saying that about a foreign ac.

Fun fact, Parrikar had nothing to do with Mk1A. It's just a politician taking credit for HAL's brainchild, and that's not even his fault.

Parrikar wasn't a bully trying to push something the IAF didn't want. He just happened to be in power when HAL provided a genius solution to the IAF's squadron issue. And the IAF took it 'cause "beggers can't be choosers."

It just so happened that LCA Mk1 became fully certified and IAF found it acceptable enough as a Mig-21 replacement, as long as it was adequately upgraded. And it just so happened that LCA Mk2 was delayed hence the increased orders for Mk1A, nothing to do with Rajnath Singh either. And it just so happened that Vajpayee was there was the first flight, Modi was there for FOC and Parrikar was there for HAL's Mk1A reimagining.

It's just unfortunate that politicians like to take credit for the work of the scientific establishment.

The IAF has said worse things about foreign aircraft.

Failed Lockheed Martin F 16 carries no improvement potential for India, say IAF veterans

Despite the ovedrive by the US-based aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, no agreement for the F-16 Block 70/72 production was inked during the recently concluded visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the US.

www.financialexpress.com

According to Air Marshal M Matheswaran (retd), former deputy chief Integrated Defence Staff, “F-16’s airframe is a third generation design that has outlived its utility. It cannot measure up to even 4th generation aircraft any more, despite all the avionics upgrades. Its components, aggregates, fuel efficiency, life cycle costs, will all be in the 3rd generation.”

Yet, they inducted the Su-30K which was nowhere close to IAF requirements 'as is' and went on to sign for 140 MKIs based on nothing but assurances from Sukhoi DB (we know how that has panned out for us with projects like INS Vikramaditya).

The MKs and Ks were inducted to train pilots, and were subsequently replaced with MKIs. These were not fully combat-capable jets, just meant for training, even combat training.

AM Philip Rajkumar who worked alongside the LCA team in the 1990s says in his book that pending issues could have been resolved post induction.

The forces do not take such chances. INSAS was a living example of that.

It's why GoI did not allow the go-ahead of LCA Mk2 and AMCA before Mk1 was fully developed. Scientists like to bully their way into the next best stuff while ignoring the previous stuff they were working on, leaving it for less influential scientists. IN complained about the same when ADA deliberately delayed developing N-LCA because they believed the IAF version was more important.

The basic airframe was well proven by that time and with a 100% flight safety record. There was no risk to flight crew that would have precluded induction, imo.

No, the airframe wasn't ready until 2013. The first two prototypes that could have been considered prototypes by Western standards were made in 2008 and 2010. ADA tried to push the third "real" prototype in 2011 without fully finishing development and that pissed the IAF off.

LCA Tejas Gets Initial Operational Clearance for Induction into IAF

IOC-2 shall enable Air Force to carry out air superiority and offensive air support missions, forward air field operations, all weather multi role operations, Electronic counter measures and night flying operations.

What's IOC-1 then? A glorified glider?

PS: All that came with FOC. So you can imagine why the IAF wants to see everything ready before induction.

Not aware of this episode but it's not as if the IAF had been denied access to the ac.

The IAF was not allowed to involve themselves in the LCA.

AM Rajkumar was associated with the LCA project since the early 1990s.

As a test pilot. He did not have any executive powers in the program.

He became involved with NFTC, a bunch of test pilots under ADA. Other than that nothing. It doesn't qualify as IAF's involvement without serving officers under proper verticals, like the one under Matheswaran, being actively part of the program.

https://setp.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/NFTC.pdf

The National Flight Test Centre (NFTC) was formed under Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) on 21 Jul 1994 for undertaking flight testing of prototype Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).

So he was deputed under DRDO for the duration of his service.

Anyway check out the interesting names under Apr 2007 and Aug 2016.

National Flight Test Center, ADA, Indian Air Force - Database

Details on National Flight Test Center, ADA - Commanding Officers, Rosters, History at www.bharat-rakshak.com

www.bharat-rakshak.com

 

[randomradio]

You must be aware that we are trying to get Engine Technology for 110 KN Engine for AMCA MK 2

That itself is holding up the MRFA deal ie we have Linked the 2 deals

And while we have tried our luck with 3 manufacturers ie Safran
Rolls Royce and GE, There is still No clarity about the way forward

F414 is expected to be signed this year, and AMCA's engine could happen the next year or so. I don't think MRFA has a part to play here, both US and France have received plenty of deals and will get more over the next few years anyway.

I'm betting on France winning the AMCA deal. And there's Rafale M coming in.

And if MRFA fails too, we could get some more flyaway Rafales.

I don't see what France has to complain about. The US too has plenty of pending deals with India, as much as France, if not more. We may involve ourselves in quite a bit of next gen tech too, stealth helicopters and stealth tankers/transports etc. More ISR drones, including stealth. More satellites, expensive ones. It's a long list.

 

[_Anonymous_]

As per this video , the incoming CAS ACM AP Singh didn't bring up the issue of the MRFA tender in his address to the press yesterday.

In response to questions on the MRFA the ACM categorically stated that a mere 2-3 squadrons is not going to suffice but on the same hand admitted there's no agreement ( with GoI ) on how to go about the procurement of these FAs.

The video concludes by noting that the IAF seems to be in wait & watch mode . If there are any slip ups in the deliveries or realisation of the current projects they'd bring the MRFA tender in the foreground.

What this means is as of the present the MRFA tender is on the back burner & is seen as some sort of back up plan in case current projects fail or are interminably delayed.

This clearly highlights what I've been claiming since the past 2 years or 2022 to be precise , that there's no agreement between the GoI & the IAF on the MRFA procurement.

That the last chance the IAF had was during the tenure of the previous CDS the late Gen Bipin Rawat where he put forth in public the disagreement between the IAF & the MoD on the mode of procurement of those Rafales wherein the MoD proposed staggered induction like the MKI whereas the IAF wanted it in one go .

Since then the IAF has been given the cold shoulder & till date we haven't had a breakthrough or consensus on this matter. And we're going to war with the Chinese later this decade "fighting with whatever we have" once again as in 1999 in the immortal words of the then IA chief Gen VP Malik.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1843143084382826610

Bang on target. Hell , I should be in the business of predicting things . I mean I may not have the kind of record OST does but at least it's not as pathetic as Avi Raina & RST .

 

[_Anonymous_]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1843252734755262895

Just in case people think I'm being the wet blanket here , this is what people who've been following the circus called IAF's procurement & it's abilities to build up force levels to a 42 squadron level since ages feel.

 

[randomradio]

At the moment F4.1 is delivered, so we're in the process of doing the F4.2 manufacturers' tests, which means that the equipment are ready, the tests may slightly modify the software to optimise the results or to correct bugs in twisted cases that only occur during flight testing. If you sign now, it will take a year to build your manufacturing plant, so we'll start building 12 aircraft at Mérignac so that the first one can be delivered to you in 2027: there's no problem with these aircraft being delivered in F4.2, then the first Indian-built aircraft will come out in 2028 and again there's no reason why we should have problems delivering it in F4.2. I think that in India the aircraft will be produced at a rate of 2 per month, i.e. 24 per year, so production will be finished in 2033, and there again there's no problem in retrofitting them to F4.3. Having been delivered in F4.2, these aircraft will have a radar with the new receiver, so they can be upgraded to RBE2 XG by adding multifunction GaN antennas, which will create a 360° bubble.

If the first jet comes in 2028, shouldn't final delivery happen before 2030? It's just 26 jets.

It's difficult to speculate how the upgrade cycle will work, but IN may do whatever the MN does. IN pretty much follows Western standards of operations. They commit to MLUs in the 20th year and phase out a decade later. Mig-29K's previously planned phase out date was 2035-40; ie, 25 years. So they will MLU in a few years and phase out by 2045-50, to match TEDBF timeframe.

 

[_Anonymous_]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1842827180868522042

https://twitter.com/x/status/1842830503076057547

https://twitter.com/x/status/1842835259588776253

Now these are hard core desi development fanatics of BRF steeped in their culture who've been following this program since the early 2000s when they were in their late teens or early twenties & RST here was in transition from diapers to half chaddis with his folks wiping the snot flowing out of his nose & washing his behind.

Up until a few years ago I didn't agree with their anti Rafale stance but since 2022 , yes that year again , the pictur's changed . Dassault suddenly bagged a plethora of orders which thanks to supply chain disruptions would keep them busy till the end of the decade & our own procurement rigmarole meant that whenever we sign an agreement it'd take close to 3-4 years for the first plane to roll out of India assuming we did so then.

We didn't . The way things stand it'd take another 3-4 years to conclude an agreement assuming we're serious about it ( the very fact that no RFP has gone out should tell us a lot ) following which add another 3-4 years for the first jet to roll out which takes one to 2032-33 by which time we'd have the Mk-2s in mass production & 2-3 years later the AMCA Mk-1.

Neither the immediate problems ( upcoming war against China ) nor the long term problems would be addressed by the MRFA. Au contraire it'd only jeopardize our existing programs.

I'm afraid the boat for the MRFA has sailed . The only way we get Rafales ( unfortunately in limited numbers ) is thru G2G imports of 2-3 squadrons , that too if it doesn't come before 2029 , it's pointless. Frankly at this stage I don't see how it is possible.

 

[randomradio]

Lol, what ACM Angad Singh said is the same as what Gagan Shakti-2018 ACM Dhanoa demonstrated in 2018, "we will fight with whatever we have." It's not a revelation. Gagan Shakti was done to prove to detractors that the IAF has what it takes to fight with just 30 squadrons, and with Bisons to boot. It appears some people make predictions using the memory of a gold fish.

The main goal of this exercise was to ensure high availability of our limited resources and rapid movement of said resources from one front to the other in 2 phases.

The only difference is our IADS is now far more advanced than what it was in 2018 with the introduction of MRSAM and S-400, and fighter jets are now carrying next gen weapons, further bolstered by the two new Rafale squadrons.

With that in mind, a new Gagan Shakti-2024 was carried out this year.

https://www.financialexpress.com/business/defence-gaganshakti-2024-indias-show-of-strength-and-preparedness-3437354

Countdown begins for Gaganshakti-2024, a crucial 10-day wargame aimed at testing the Indian Air Force’s (IAF) preparedness to counter potential threats from both Pakistan and China simultaneously. This upcoming exercise is expected to surpass the scale of the 2018 all-air force drill, which saw the participation of nearly 1150 aircraft.
Ah, all this handholding and spoonfeeding is getting tiring.

Anyway:

Rafale, S-400 are a booster dose, says IAF chief Birender Singh Dhanoa

Addressing the annual press conference ahead of Air Force Day on October 8, ACM Dhanoa said that the IAF “had been consulted at an appropriate level” when the government took the decision to procure only 36 Rafale aircraft.

indianexpress.com

INDIAN Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa Wednesday said that the depleting fighter strength of the Indian Air Force (IAF) was its “main concern” which cannot be allowed to go below 30-31 fighter squadrons. In this context, he said, the procurement of Rafale fighter aircraft from France and the S-400 missile shield from Russia are “like a booster dose for the IAF”.

Both the Gagan Shakti exercises proved that the IAF must maintain a fleet of 30-31 squadrons for a two-front war at the minimum, and we have successfully done so. We are currently at 31 squadrons, with 2 Bison squadrons pending phase out. With 9 new LCA squadrons, we will be well above that limit in the next 7 years. And during this time, we will also induct Akash NG and XRSAM, completing our IADS network for this modernization cycle.

PS: A two-front war is quite unlikely within this generation, so we have sufficient fighters for a one-front war. While we have numbers, we lack technology. So I had hoped a few years ago that we will buy 2 squadrons of FGFA between 2027-30 to make up for the tech deficiency before Rafale F5 and AMCA become available, but alas, that's not in the cards anymore. The two LCA variants will now act as the stopgap instead.

Although a war with China is not in the cards anymore this decade, in case we do go to war we will have to fight from lower altitudes than we would normally do, thereby reducing the range of BVR weapons, use IADS more aggressively and fighter jets more defensively while also limiting excursions into enemy territory. And we will have to focus on supporting ground troops using standoff weapons like glide bombs and other PGMs, while deep strikes will have to be conducted using long range weapons, which hopefully our Western allies will be able to provide in copious amounts, like the palletized Rapid Dragon. So we can still fight China today without a next gen fighter.