Bruh, this is wrong on so many levels
The 2026 production batches are delivered in a "new technical configuration" with upgraded sensor fusion from real Ukraine combat feedback. N036 Byelka is a full AESA (not analog) with X-band main + side-looking X/L-band cheek arrays + 101KS Atoll IRST. This gives true 360° passive coverage and beaming tactics that Rafale's forward-only RBE2 can't match. The optical suite is superior for passive hunting.
The Su-57 has an analog radar, the same as the F-22 and F-35. Even the Rafale F3R carries an analog radar. F4 got the digital upgrade.
And even if it's delivered in a "new technical configuration," it's still WIP. In order to unlock real world capabilities, it has to be operationally tested. F-35 achieved IOC in 2016 and FOC in 2019, but it's still not fully operational. MKI was inducted in 2002 but became operational only in 2007. What was delivered was the hardware with minimal software, and the software is unlocked after operational testing and that takes a few years. Without the software, it's just paperweight.
Su-57 and Su-57M right now are still in IOC. In another 2 years, Su-57M will achieve FOC. And then, whether they take 2 or 3 years (standard French development time for block upgrades) or 10+ years (the F-35 f*ckup), it's up to them.
For us to make a decision, the jet first needs to get FOC with Izd 30, and then show off their avionics in lab conditions, like the F-35 did with JSE. That's the bare minimum.
Rafale F5 (with RBE2-XG GaN radar) is still in early development, ground tests ongoing, service entry early 2030s at best. Rafale F4/F5 is a good 4.5-gen but lacks internal bays, supermaneuverability, and native drone control that the two-seat Su-57M already demonstrates. Su57 has capabilities of both latest 5th gen and some future 6th gen platforms not seen in any other jets.
Those other features are unfortunately irrelevant right now. Even the F5 is not relevant today, but if the F4 comes with GaN and the Su-57 does not match that, it's gonna be a problem. There are different degrees in system design of the GaN too, so it's gonna have to match that level at the bare minimum. Virupaksha is also GaN-on-SiC, but comes with subarray partitioning rather than element-level partitioning.
What matters to the IAF is far ahead on the Rafale; the radar, EW suite, and software maturity, alongside operational maturity of the airframe and engine. The expectation is the Su-57 combines its superior airframe and engine with superior avionics too. But with avionics not even matching the F4 while potentially being behind F5, it makes the Su-57 useless to the IAF. You are expecting the IAF to take a massive risk with an aircraft that's not likely to be better than the Rafale in what the IAF considers to be the most important category, the core avionics?
False, unless france makes a completely new jet, no version of rafale is even gonna remotely match the Su57 let alone the upgraded Indian Su57 especially in an era of bvr combat and one where you have to also combat in contested enemy airspace, Su57 incorporates stealth shapping, radar blockers, internal weapons bay, ram coating etc while rafale lacks all of the above with a conventional 4th gen airframe. In contest airspace against 5th gen fighters, advanced enemy AD, the rafale will fail to penetrate deep and have to rely on stand off weapons and jamming unlike Su57 which can penetrate deeper. The rafale will also almost destroy its rcs values if it uses a heavy strike loadout.
It's not that simple. Rafale penetrates enemy airspace using tactics, the Su-57 is not suitable for using such tactics. Rafale's also designed to fight using its own unique strengths that most other fighters are not designed for, that's also why its AAMs, bombs, and defensive systems are unique. Both jets are complementary in the use of tactics.
Recent evidence also shows that no matter how much american fanboys wants to pretend stealth solves everything, manuverability is a critical factor on whether your aircraft will make it out of enemy airspace in one piece or not. Su57 has 3d thrust vectoring, levcons, large wing area, better engines all giving supermaneuverability, post-stall control, and better energy retention. All which will be crucial in enemy airspace.
Su-57 has not been designed to survive in enemy airspace. It's been designed to fulfill Su-35's role, ie, protect Russian airspace from within Russia. You need to read up on Russian air defense doctrine.
For operating inside enemy airspace, they will have to work on a penetrating strike variant that acts as a successor to the Su-34.
The Su-57's main job is to just fire missiles from long range, that's also why it comes with an external EOTS, 'cause dropping bombs is a secondary role. You don't need to penetrate hostile airspace if you don't plan on dropping bombs. The S-37 will handle that.
Massive difference as I already mentioned above. India would learn precision faceting, edge alignment, radar blockers in intakes, and advanced radar-absorbent coatings, technologies that are still new to us. This is far more advanced than anything we get from Rafale which is not even stealthy.
Local production has no relevance to R&D. Whatever we import and produce won't be handed over to ADA or DRDO, be it Rafale or Su-57.
We are already working on far more advanced technologies for AMCA.
In any case, by the time all that ToT comes in, AMCA will be finishing flight testing, making all of this pointless.
The Su-57 uses 25–70% composites in critical areas (wing, fuselage, canards). Building it locally would give HAL experience in large co-cured composite assemblies, something we are still learning on AMCA.
We are already there.
ADA and NAL's breakthrough in composite technology for AMCA program marks a milestone in it's development. As it promises a more lighter & efficient fighter.
www.republicworld.com
Su-57's tech won't help AMCA.
Integrating tandem bays with launchers, bay doors, and weapon interfaces teaches us how to manage internal carriage without compromising structural integrity, a core 5th-gen skill AMCA desperately needs.
We are already there. This won't help AMCA either.
Not to mention other technologies like 3d thrust vectoring, variable intakes, multi-band sensor integration, E-pilot & AI Assisted Avionics and other Supply Chain and Industrial Ecosystem development for local production of these components.
None of what you have listed anywhere will help AMCA. It's too late.
All the technologies meant to go on AMCA already exist today. That's why it's taken so much time to start the program.
That's a completely different deal and unrelated to the Rafale or Su57.
I'm talking about the level of ToT expected from here on. If the West is willing to give up 5th gen engine tech + roadmap to 6th gen with 100% ToT, the Russians will have to match. It's now the bare minimum.
Except they haven't, there is no real or offical sources claiming this. All I could find is at best 50% to maybe 60% tot and that includes only assembly of engine here, no mention of tot for core components or full 100% tot for engine you claim. I'm happy to be proven wrong if you got any real evidence for such claims.
They won't achieve 60% ToT without handing over the airframe and engine.
France has accepted the Indian request that defence technologies shared with the Indian military should not be given to New Delhi’s adversaries. France’s relationship has already reached a new low with Pakistan after PM Imran Khan attacked President Macron.| India News
www.hindustantimes.com
Back then, 70% represented the airframe and engine for the F3R. Electronics has become a whole lot more expensive, so the French should be able to manage 60% after handing over the airframe and engine.
The russians didnt prevent us from modifying the engines, they said you can modify and play around with the engine but since you will replace their tried and tested components with a different ones, they cant give give them warranty if some issues arises. Literally any manufacturer in the word would do the same let alone for the most complex engineering equipment humans have ever made. Why are they supposed to give guarannte for something which they didn't cause?
No, the Russians refused to certify the engine. It's fine if they don't provide warranty, but without engine certification, they will even refuse certification on the entire jet.
They basically said we can go ahead without their permission since they can't stop it, but that they won't certify anything, that's pretty much a denial.
After replacing F414's American parts with Indian, the Americans will certify the engine.
Its standard and yet only 3 countries in the world actually ever made made and operates it. Also, let me get this straight, your great Idea to fix our growing squadron problem and to combat future 5th and 6th generation jets and advanced SAM is to buy more 4th gen jets instead of buying a 5th gen one giving us unrivalled flexibility in modifying and operating it?
Because our goal is now to introduce 6th gen avionics on a 5th gen airframe. Su-57 cannot meet that expectation within the same time as AMCA's arrival. Let's see if it even matches the Rafale first.
Hell, all this is irrelevant if the Su-57 doesn't come with Izd 30 in the first place. Even the Su-57M1 comes with just an uprated IOC engine. It shows how far behind the program has fallen.
