Now that situation with Russia vs Ukraine,
India putting hold on US drones,
Talks about how France is reliable supplier irrespective of situations..
Rafale M should be the winner right?
Drones:
We have been operating their drones for quite some time through a lease, it doesn't look like the govt is happy with the price for the capability being offered. Let's see whether there's room for negotiations. A better option is to just lease some for now and buy time for indigenous solutions. We will eventually operate 200+ such drones.
Navy fighter:
France is reliable by default, but they are more money minded. But the US is even more reliable when it benefits them. A strong IN benefits them, so they will do their best to give us the technologies necessary to move up the value chain at sea. Otoh, they would like to see a weaker IA and IAF because that will increase our reliance on them, especially so if Ladakh falls to the Chinese. So we need to be careful how we deal with the US, but, at least for now, the IN benefits a lot. Politically, both are excellent suppliers.
As for the capability of the jets themselves, it's difficult to say. The IN doesn't require most of the back breaking capabilities of the Rafale like the IAF does. The same with avionics, the IN finds the SH meets their requirements, so the Rafale's more capable avionics may not necessarily entice them, especially so if it comes with a significant cost difference. So, even if the Rafale is the better jet, the IN may end up going for "just right" instead of exceptional. The SH is also less of a hassle due to elevator constraints.
There are a few advantages for the SH that the Rafale cannot match.
One, interoperability when it comes to supply chain, logistics and force coordination with the USN.
Two, access to their experience in carrier construction and operation.
Three, the two-seat version can be operated from carriers. It's needed for drone operations.
Four, potential access to upcoming drones that can be operated alongside the SH.
Five, engine commonality with TEDBF. And with the IAF's LCA and AMCA Mk1.
War at sea actually requires other capabilities rather than the tech specs of jets. Like the ability to find and identify targets, so you can fire long range AShMs at them. Point one is a massive advantage here.
Points three and four could actually become quite important in just 5 years. So, while fighters stay at long range, drones can get close and personal with the enemy.
Both jets are politically safe choices, but I just think the SH has the advantage.
