MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

[Bon Plan]

Now unfortunately it seems even that 36 off the shelf order is becoming unviable due to timelines brought on by UAE's 80 jet order and supply chain issues.

It is always possible to give to a dear friend some french air force Rafale plot in the planning.

Dassault plan to increase the Rafale production rate do 3 a month next year. That means that UAE complete order delivered in 2 1/2 year !

If you really need it, Dassault will deliver it.

 

[randomradio]

Best option for immediate induction is go for F15EX or EFT. Does anyone have any idea of spec & weapon package for EFT Tranche5 offered to us?
@randomradio

F-15EX is outdated. It's fine for existing operators, not new ones.

EFT, we have to see.

 

[Bon Plan]

It's not specifically the US , it's the Anglo alliance - the 5i's . As long as the alliance prevails , in the hierarchy of nations even among close allies , the US will be the paramount power & the UK will always enjoy preferential treatment as compared to all the other European allies , France included .

The most overt demonstration of it was the AUKUS & how France was outmaneuvered .

And Australia seems more and more aware that they were the cuckold of that history !

They were scared of the french bill for 12 subs delivered before 2032, now the bill is the triple, with no subs before 2040. GOOOOD !

 

[Bon Plan]

Best option for immediate induction is go for F15EX or EFT. Does anyone have any idea of spec & weapon package for EFT Tranche5 offered to us?
@randomradio

No. a new bird imply a new logistic, and IAF is already a logistic mess.

F-15EX is outdated. It's fine for existing operators, not new ones.

EFT, we have to see.

EFT is interesting for India only on air supremacy, but you already have Su30, and it will be heavily upgraded.
EFT is short on air to ground missions and deep strike.
Not a good solution for the Indian context.

F-15EX is outdated. It's fine for existing operators, not new ones.

EFT, we have to see.

EFT is interesting for India only on air supremacy, but you already have Su30, and it will be heavily upgraded.
EFT is short on air to ground missions and deep strike.
Not a good solution for the Indian context.

 

[Lolwa]

We don't need to do all that. Our numbers have been decided for now.

13 MKI + 2 Rafale + 11 LCA + 6 MWF + 6 MRFA + 7 AMCA = 45 squadrons.

There's no space for anything new unless we wanna get rid of the unupgraded MKIs prematurely.

We need 50+ squadrons considering attrition. The blk 3 jf-17 will have the first movers advantage with the pl-15. Our mirages and mig 29's are badly positioned unless the astra mk

Best option for immediate induction is go for F15EX or EFT. Does anyone have any idea of spec & weapon package for EFT Tranche5 offered to us?
@randomradio

EFT has aim 120d, meteor, iris t, spear ew, jdam, kepd 350, scalp EG all nato munitions. It's the best deal right now.

 

[Hydra]

F-15EX is outdated. It's fine for existing operators, not new ones.

EFT, we have to see.

I think everything except the Russian jets in the tendering process is worth buying including F16 version offered. F25EX os an old design, but not outdated and van destroy any su30 we & chna flying now.

 

[randomradio]

EFT is interesting for India only on air supremacy, but you already have Su30, and it will be heavily upgraded.
EFT is short on air to ground missions and deep strike.
Not a good solution for the Indian context.

It's a competitor though, it's the only jet keeping up with the Rafale in MRFA.

So new avionics and a new British/Italian combat cloud plus drone will become important metrics.

 

[Speedster1]

One big reason why the IAF chose the Rafale in the first place was that it was designed with the N-strike role in mind. It was meant to replace both the M2000N and the carrier borne Super Etendard in that role. Buying any other ac means spending big bucks on hardening electronics against EMP, etc.
The Brits gave up their air launched nuke in favour of sub deterrent so India would have do it on its own dime.

Dealing with 4 nations of the EF consortium with their convoluted approval processes (for upgrades, weapons intregration and maintenance issues) is going to be a pain. The Brits have denied weapons licenses to Israel when it needed them most.

 

[randomradio]

We need 50+ squadrons considering attrition. The blk 3 jf-17 will have the first movers advantage with the pl-15. Our mirages and mig 29's are badly positioned unless the astra mk

Drones will gain primacy eliminating the need of more manned fighters.

Our Mig-29s are expected to be upgraded again, aditional 10 years, new avionics. The M2000s are fine with their MICAs. It's too expensive to upgrade them again, never mind the fact that they have everything we need for now. The current gen M2000s can work in tandem with Rafales to boost their capabilities.

 

[randomradio]

I think everything except the Russian jets in the tendering process is worth buying including F16 version offered. F25EX os an old design, but not outdated and van destroy any su30 we & chna flying now.

All junk compared to Rafale and Typhoon. Nothing much has changed for any of the contenders since MMRCA.

LCA Mk2 is better than both the Teens. And for India, the Su-35 and Mig-35 offers are superior to them as well.

To put things in perspective, the Mig-21 is from the 60s, the Teens are from the 70s, and the 35s are from the 80s. Rafale, Typhoon, Mk2 and Gripen E are from the 2000s. So all the pre-2000s jets are pointless to the IAF, never mind stuff from the 70s.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Bring an white paper. Clearly state the resources we might be able to allocate for various major programs of 3 services till 2040.

Then for IAF give the specific retirement timelines and when they actually expect MMRCA 2 to start delivering.

Also state if they are okay with MMRCA 2.0 delivering the planes starting by 2033-34, give a go ahead to TEDBF and it's spinoff ORCA the go ahead. That would in any scenario be better than planes which our Bison shot down over Kashmir.

If not, if they want the planes immediately to arrest falling numbers. Do a detailed analysis of building more Su30MKIs inhouse vs importing a solution off the shelf.


Present all this in parliament.

 

[Rajput Lion]

F-15EX is outdated. It's fine for existing operators, not new ones.

EFT, we have to see.

Unfortunately except Rafale and F-35, no other jets will fulfill our requirements.

F-35 could be offered if Trump comes to power. So let's see.......

 

[Hydra]

All junk compared to Rafale and Typhoon. Nothing much has changed for any of the contenders since MMRCA.

LCA Mk2 is better than both the Teens. And for India, the Su-35 and Mig-35 offers are superior to them as well.

To put things in perspective, the Mig-21 is from the 60s, the Teens are from the 70s, and the 35s are from the 80s. Rafale, Typhoon, Mk2 and Gripen E are from the 2000s. So all the pre-2000s jets are pointless to the IAF, never mind stuff from the 70s.

By that standard MK2 is a latr 80 product, but it isn't right? Similarly F15EX also relevant.
Regarding Russian stuffs, action speaks louder. A second hand refurbished f16 had shot down a su34 recently ,those who blame Russian unskilled pilots for this should remember that PAF f16 stop the so called superior IAF pilots flying MKI from engaging the aggressor in 2019.

 

[randomradio]

Bring an white paper. Clearly state the resources we might be able to allocate for various major programs of 3 services till 2040.

Then for IAF give the specific retirement timelines and when they actually expect MMRCA 2 to start delivering.

Also state if they are okay with MMRCA 2.0 delivering the planes starting by 2033-34, give a go ahead to TEDBF and it's spinoff ORCA the go ahead. That would in any scenario be better than planes which our Bison shot down over Kashmir.

If not, if they want the planes immediately to arrest falling numbers. Do a detailed analysis of building more Su30MKIs inhouse vs importing a solution off the shelf.


Present all this in parliament.

We don't release white paper because our strategy is to maintain ambiguity. Since our resources do not match requirements, we have to keep our enemies guessing. Once we get rich, things will change, because then others will view us with suspicion and making the white paper public will help reduce that.

TEDBF/ORCA is not being developed with IAF requirements in mind.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

TEDBF/ORCA is not being developed with IAF requirements in mind.

Let TEDBF happen first. And if it's better than Gripen, Mig-35, F16, F18, Su35, F15 on offer, then allow it in the competition or eliminate/disregard it with the others.

We don't release white paper because our strategy is to maintain ambiguity. Since our resources do not match requirements, we have to keep our enemies guessing. Once we get rich, things will change, because then others will view us with suspicion and making the white paper public will help reduce that.

I am not aware of any such policy. Do guide me where can I read upon this policy.

 

[randomradio]

By that standard MK2 is a latr 80 product, but it isn't right? Similarly F15EX also relevant.
Regarding Russian stuffs, action speaks louder. A second hand refurbished f16 had shot down a su34 recently ,those who blame Russian unskilled pilots for this should remember that PAF f16 stop the so called superior IAF pilots flying MKI from engaging the aggressor in 2019.

Mk2 is from 2000s. It has a composite skin with sub-1m2 RCS.

Su-34 is a strike jet; without support, it will get shot down. It's a tactical failure for the Russians, not technological.

Only Pakistanis, anti-India haters and the ignorant think 2 MKIs stopping some 15+ F-16s is a loss for the MKIs.

In any case, the Su-35 and Mig-35 are still better options compared to F-15EX and F-21, and mostly because the cousins of these jets are still in operation in India. Similarly, for the US and allies, F-15EX and F-21 are better options because of existing inventory. That's all it is, if you are operating similar jets, you can just buy more of the same, but it's not going to increase the capabilities of your air force. The Mig-29K and UPG upgraded with LCA Mk2 avionics will make them superior to F-21. Similarly, the MKI MLU will make it superior to the F-15EX. Hence the irrelevancy of all 4 jets to the IAF.

Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen E and Mk2 are a generation ahead in comparison. All 4 will come with avionics that are similar or on par with the F-35's upcoming Block 4 avionics. So even in terms of what's considered cutting edge today, the F-21 and F-15EX are half a generation behind.

 

[randomradio]

Unfortunately except Rafale and F-35, no other jets will fulfill our requirements.

F-35 could be offered if Trump comes to power. So let's see.......

Best not to keep hopes up due to the ToT requirement.

 

[randomradio]

Let TEDBF happen first. And if it's better than Gripen, Mig-35, F16, F18, Su35, F15 on offer, then allow it in the competition or eliminate/disregard it with the others.

It's practically impossible. TEDBF requirements have not even been finalized yet whereas the IAF will want a "proven" airframe at the minimum by 2027 or so for evaluations, given a 2025 tender start. And by the time ORCA makes first flight, we could very well have signed MRFA.

Anyhow, TEDBF is being designed for 2035+, and it will achieve maturity only around 2040, which will then meet IAF's MRFA standards for evaluations, ie, a proven airframe. So ORCA is definitely not in contention with MRFA.

But why buy ORCA when we can buy AMCA?

I am not aware of any such policy. Do guide me where can I read upon this policy.

The fact that there isn't a white paper is proof enough. The govt has written white papers, but none have been formalized, never mind released to the public. Instead the forces themselves publicly provide their strategies and doctrines unilaterally.

Everybody knows what we want for now, maintaining territorial integrity and becoming the net security provider in the IOR. And our military is already focused on that, as publicly revealed by them. But what is private is what we are going to do beyond that. If there's a requirement to establish capabilities that will help us invade the ME or SEA, why the frig are they going to tell you that?

In simple terms, our objectives are offensive capabilities against Pakistan, offensive-defense capabilities against China and net security provider for the IOR. There, that's your white paper.

Once we start creating expeditionary capabilities via a marine corps, supercarriers, LHDs, strategic bombers etc, we will have to make our intentions clear. So until then a formal white paper isn't necessary.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

In simple terms, our objectives are offensive capabilities against Pakistan, offensive-defense capabilities against China and net security provider for the IOR. There, that's your white paper.

Break this down under 2025-35 and then 2035- beyond.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

It's practically impossible. TEDBF requirements have not even been finalized yet whereas the IAF will want a "proven" airframe at the minimum by 2027 or so for evaluations, given a 2025 tender start. And by the time ORCA makes first flight, we could very well have signed MRFA.

Anyhow, TEDBF is being designed for 2035+, and it will achieve maturity only around 2040, which will then meet IAF's MRFA standards for evaluations, ie, a proven airframe. So ORCA is definitely not in contention with MRFA.

But why buy ORCA when we can buy AMCA?

All I am saying is the timelines. If a Rafale from an Indian line joining IAF in 2035 is the goal, then just keep TEDBF/AMCA option open.