An unproven platform, yes, the IAF will not go for it without it being proven. So minimum 2030 for a Su-57 decision, whether they wanna buy it outright (3+ years from contract), MKIze it (7+ years), or go for FGFA (13-15 years).
Waiting for either Su-57 MKI or F-35 Block-4 to mature would mean they'd be available at around the same time as AMCA.
Any import would not be entertained at that point. If we want a stop-gap, obviously that can't be what we aim for. IF we want a stopgap, that is.
We don't. Our procurement plan prepares us to deal with the J-20.
Our procurement plan already involves inducting a J-35 equivalent in the 2030s - the AMCA.
But this plan means we'd only operationalize our J-35 equivalent about a decade after PAF does. The question is do we want to do that sooner? If answer is yes, then we need a stop-gap import. If no, then just stay the course.
Within AMCA's timeline the main threat will be 6th gen. So we are not playing this generation game within this modernization cycle.
AMCA will have a long upgrade path ahead of it. The initial version with F414 will be readily equivalent to J-35 & be able to survive against J-20, while the next-gen engines will make it superior to both while holding its own against Chinese 6G.
Continuing from the previous point, we are gonna jump straight to whatever will be considered advanced in 2060.
The path to that leads through AMCA and the next-gen engine program.
SCAF will be operational only by 2050, 10 years after AMCA.
Yeah - that's what I said. We want a stealthy platform operational at least a decade before the French plan to.
It's not about generic stealth, it's about avionics and networking.
The airframe is a necessary component, the rest will be mostly upgradable onto even 4.5G platforms. Mostly.
We're even likely to create a Tejas Mk-3 with the next-gen engine.