Trump Offers F-35 Jet to India in Push for More Defense Deals

The choice was between S-400 and F-35 and the IAF chose the former. With Trump, we might have a chance but as we've seen with the C-17 requirement, GoI/MoD does things at a snails pace, even when the damn production line was about to close.

Now they're looking for used C-17s that no other user would want to spare. 4 years will be gone in a flash and the usual chai-biskoot over the F-35 will continue. Though the cost will be much higher than $80m a pop as is being reported in the media.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Paro, Rajput Lion and Ginvincible

Former president of Türkiye's defense acquisitions agency SSB on ridiculous F-35 preconditions:
  • Paying huge sums for the F-35 isn't the problem, it's the utter dependence on the US that it creates.
  • We couldn't fly our jets in 1974* because the US refused to provide their spare tires! Even the tiniest sanctions can have huge impacts. * Likely referring to their F-4 Phantom fleet.
  • F-35 requires regular code updates and a unique password just to *TURN ON*, that is provided to customers by the US *DAILY*. What if they stop giving it to you?
  • US completely oversees and remotely controls your entire F-35 supply chain. What you need, when you need it, how many, you don't tell them, they tell you. And you have to pay to get it.
  • An F-35 engine overhaul center was going to be set up in Türkiye. But Americans said there would be a restricted section within it that would only employ US staff and be off limits to Turkish staff. What kind of partnership is this?
  • No technical access to the hot sections of the engines whatsoever.
  • No access to US-provided avionics or source codes.
  • Even the old RAM paint that gets scraped off before repainting, the aircraft gets shipped back to the US to keep us from reverse-engineering the chemicals.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Paro, Ashwin, South block and 4 others
randomradio said:
MRFA obviously. But it won't work out the way Trump hopes it will. Only Rafale and Typhoon are worthy of being shortlisted.



Yep, never gonna happen.



Boeing's offering F-15EX to India.



Totally different requirement.



Yeah, alternatives. Stryker, more P-8s and Guardians. More Apaches and Chinooks coming up too. And Romeos too. All this is worth $15-20B. It's enough.

NASAMS is dead to us. So are the Patriot and THAAD. There was talk of the US entering India's BMD program, but they haven't done anything of the sort yet. I don't think they can offering anything the Israelis haven't already. And our missiles are all indigenous. We are already flight testing P2 and working on P3, so it's too late.

But space stuff remains an option. NISAR could give birth to more advanced capabilities.



That will derail the IN's indigenization plans, which is much more important than the IAF's in the long term.



The SH isn't suitable in a fight against China. The SH B3 has already been rejected during MMRCA, and it's not seen any significant new developments since then, so it's practically impossible for it to meet any new requirement. So this will not happen either. None of the Teens are good enough.

Although Trump has now offered the F-35, it's still unrealistic as it stands today. TR-3 is already delayed and the engine upgrade is meant for 2029+, which will definitely see more delays. It will take until 2033 to get the jet fully up to spec and any induction can happen only from 2035. So, as far as the IAF is concerned, the jet is not even close to being ready, regardless of the mistake some of the Europeans made by committing too early.

Plus the IAF is not going to let the Americans, Russians, and the domestic lobby derail their 20-year procurement plan set up in 2022; LCA, MRFA, and AMCA. So whatever that 'ultimately' is, it's not gonna happen under Trump's current administration anyway.

Btw, MRFA is gonna begin soon. We will hopefully see it signed in 2030, alongside the start of Mk2's production. And then, the IAF will look at the current progress of AMCA and Ghatak before deciding on a stopgap measure. By then, both F-35A and a more stealthy Su-60 will be ready for production, alongside the Mig-41 and NGAD. So then they can pick and choose what fits if they think AMCA alone won't cut it. So there's not going to be anything else on the horizon for the next 5 years.
Click to expand...
SH B3 didn't participate in MMRCA.
 
Hydra said:
SH B3 didn't participate in MMRCA.
Click to expand...

None of the jets tested in MMRCA were fully operational. All required technologies were tested mostly on prototypes and testbeds. So B3 was the one on offer to India and then sold to the USN as an upgrade. It failed to beat Rafale M anyway.
 
randomradio said:
F-35B sucks. Even the Marines are cutting its numbers down. We cannot reliably use it in the Himalayas anyway.



The S-400 was just used an excuse to stop the delivery of F-35s to Turkey after the American-led coup on Erdogan failed.

After having extracted their pound of flesh, after Syria fell basically, Turkey is now allowed to deploy the S-400 alongside the F-35. Apparently, all the claimed technical issues have magically disappeared.
Click to expand...
F-35B does not suck the reason marines are cutting the B is because of priority of mission has change to a chicom centric role which is why they are getting more F-35C. USMC love their B's they can takeoff fully loaded of LHD giving them greater combat radius than a flanker taking off a skijump carrier.

-The Marine Corps plans to double its buy of the carrier-borne F-35C variant and scale back its buy of the short-takeoff-vertical-landing F-35B, according to a new aviation plan from the service.

The service’s total F-35 buy of 420 aircraft remains unchanged, but the service will now buy 280 F-35Bs instead of the planned 353 jets, and 140 F-35Cs instead of the planned 67 jets, according to the 2025 Marine Aviation Plan released Monday. This means the Marines will field 12 F-35B squadrons and eight F-35C squadrons. Notably, the plan also expands the size of F-35 squadrons from 10 to 12 fighters.

In a statement, Lockheed Martin said, “We support the U.S. Marine Corps’ decision to adjust to an F-35 fleet configuration that best allows them to fulfill their critical missions with the world’s most advanced aircraft.”

The decision to buy more F-35Cs suggests a “greater prioritization of carrier-based operations”, and a desire to fast-track the integration of the jets with forces in the Indo-Pacific region, said Jon Hemler, a military aerospace analyst with Forecast International.
www.defenseone.com

Marines aim to buy more carrier-based F-35s, fewer VTOLs

Corps’ new aviation plan also expands squadrons—but not UAV-buying plans.
www.defenseone.com www.defenseone.com

Same capacities of the A/C but just a bit shorter in combat radius. When it comes to skijump fighters/non-catapult the F-35 is in a league of its own including range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Picdelamirand-oil said:

Former president of Türkiye's defense acquisitions agency SSB on ridiculous F-35 preconditions:
  • Paying huge sums for the F-35 isn't the problem, it's the utter dependence on the US that it creates.
  • We couldn't fly our jets in 1974* because the US refused to provide their spare tires! Even the tiniest sanctions can have huge impacts. * Likely referring to their F-4 Phantom fleet.
  • F-35 requires regular code updates and a unique password just to *TURN ON*, that is provided to customers by the US *DAILY*. What if they stop giving it to you?
  • US completely oversees and remotely controls your entire F-35 supply chain. What you need, when you need it, how many, you don't tell them, they tell you. And you have to pay to get it.
  • An F-35 engine overhaul center was going to be set up in Türkiye. But Americans said there would be a restricted section within it that would only employ US staff and be off limits to Turkish staff. What kind of partnership is this?
  • No technical access to the hot sections of the engines whatsoever.
  • No access to US-provided avionics or source codes.
  • Even the old RAM paint that gets scraped off before repainting, the aircraft gets shipped back to the US to keep us from reverse-engineering the chemicals.
Click to expand...

For a stopgap deal, the engine and RAM bits are not really deal killers. The ODIN supply chain is ridiculous, the IAF will expect a spares warehouse, like Israel. But the daily code update is definitely a deal breaker. I'm sure Israel has a workaround for that as well.

And the F-35I does manage some of the other operational problems, so the template for independent operations exists in Israel.

Turkey's deal was much larger and included local production, so granted they are miffed about the conditions. If India doesn't get the same conditions as Israel, perhaps better, then it won't work out.
 
Speedster1 said:
The choice was between S-400 and F-35 and the IAF chose the former.
Click to expand...

Never. The choice was between Patriot/THAAD combo and S-400.

Speedster1 said:
Now they're looking for used C-17s that no other user would want to spare. 4 years will be gone in a flash and the usual chai-biskoot over the F-35 will continue. Though the cost will be much higher than $80m a pop as is being reported in the media.
Click to expand...

Political ploy to visibily exhaust non-Russian options before going for an IL-76 upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paro
randomradio said:
For a stopgap deal, the engine and RAM bits are not really deal killers. The ODIN supply chain is ridiculous, the IAF will expect a spares warehouse, like Israel. But the daily code update is definitely a deal breaker. I'm sure Israel has a workaround for that as well.

And the F-35I does manage some of the other operational problems, so the template for independent operations exists in Israel.

Turkey's deal was much larger and included local production, so granted they are miffed about the conditions. If India doesn't get the same conditions as Israel, perhaps better, then it won't work out.
Click to expand...
I hope meteor integration is on the lines. Because we could combine the capabilities of the F-35 ADIR and the European f-35's(especially british & italian f-35's. The British f-35's are similarly spec'd to our rafales too.
I hope the Americans are not too paranoid. Let's see...
 
Parthu said:
While it's good that the F-35 offer is finally, officially on the table - the above quote is the operative line.

It'll all depend on what 'paving the way to ultimately provide' means. Because this could either mean having to purchase F-21, F-15EX or F/A-18SH before getting the F-35...or it could simply mean having to get rid of the S400 (maybe replaced with THAAD/Patriot combo, but let's not assume). Or perhaps both.

I would hope it's just the latter. With Project Kusha/ERADS going ahead, we have a way to supplant the S400 capability set in the foreseeable future with indigenous alternatives. So junking the S400 (which I have serious doubts about btw) could be relatively straightforward though it would mean we wasted $6B.

The former (or a combination of both former & latter) could be much more tricky. Procuring either F-21 or F-15EX will mean shooting the potential of the Tejas Mk2 and Super-MKI programs in the foot, respectively. I'm not a fan of sacrificing either of these programs. The F-21 doesn't really offer any capability that the Tejas Mk2 can't provide, so it's pointless. While the new-build F-15EX is certainly more capable in several regards than the MKI UPG, it wouldn't be significantly more capable (save for the engines). So that too is hard to justify given the cost.

That leaves us with the F/A-18 SH Block-3.

If we have to sacrifice something anyway in order to not cede the look-first, shoot-first advantage to PAF/PLAAF for the next 15 or so years, then I prefer that we sacrifice the Rafale-M instead of indigenous programs.

We've already evaluated the SH under MRCBF so that'll save some time. The production line has been extended till 2027 anyway.

The only question is, will the small 26-plane MRCBF order be enough to satisfy Trump to pave the way for the F-35? Hopefully, we can balance that out by procuring additional systems elsewhere (more P8, Chinook, Apache, etc. it's also possible NASAMS is back on table).

Another way to sweeten the deal would be a combined F-35A + F-35B procurement (and cancel TEDBF, that's one program I'm willing to sacrifice, because it's so irredeemably ill-conceived to begin with).

EDIT: If the 26 F/A-18 aren't enough, might as well get IAF to order a couple or so squadrons off the shelf as well. It'll kill off any possibility of more Rafales but that's the price of not signing a follow-on deal for nearly 9 years.
Click to expand...
I honestly feel we can handle having the f-15EX,f-21 and superhornet within the IAF on top of having the su-57 and f-35. We have a huge gap that needs to be filled. The mirage, mig29 and jaguars need a replacement. The replacements exist. If we join the GAE mic supply chain it will be pretty useful.
I'm just being ambitious...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Innominate said:
F-35B does not suck the reason marines are cutting the B is because of priority of mission has change to a chicom centric role which is why they are getting more F-35C. USMC love their B's they can takeoff fully loaded of LHD giving them greater combat radius than a flanker taking off a skijump carrier.

-The Marine Corps plans to double its buy of the carrier-borne F-35C variant and scale back its buy of the short-takeoff-vertical-landing F-35B, according to a new aviation plan from the service.

The service’s total F-35 buy of 420 aircraft remains unchanged, but the service will now buy 280 F-35Bs instead of the planned 353 jets, and 140 F-35Cs instead of the planned 67 jets, according to the 2025 Marine Aviation Plan released Monday. This means the Marines will field 12 F-35B squadrons and eight F-35C squadrons. Notably, the plan also expands the size of F-35 squadrons from 10 to 12 fighters.

In a statement, Lockheed Martin said, “We support the U.S. Marine Corps’ decision to adjust to an F-35 fleet configuration that best allows them to fulfill their critical missions with the world’s most advanced aircraft.”

The decision to buy more F-35Cs suggests a “greater prioritization of carrier-based operations”, and a desire to fast-track the integration of the jets with forces in the Indo-Pacific region, said Jon Hemler, a military aerospace analyst with Forecast International.
www.defenseone.com

Marines aim to buy more carrier-based F-35s, fewer VTOLs

Corps’ new aviation plan also expands squadrons—but not UAV-buying plans.
www.defenseone.com www.defenseone.com
Click to expand...

Yep, and that's a good decision. The C is defintiely a winner in comparison.

Sure, the F-35 is better than the Chicom Flanker, but it needs to be compared with upcoming Chinese jets like the J-35 and possibly J-50.

Innominate said:
Same capacities of the A/C but just a bit shorter in combat radius. When it comes to skijump fighters/non-catapult the F-35 is in a league of its own including range.
Click to expand...

The main issue with the B is the smaller IWB. The shorter combat radius, lower TWR and performance, more maintenance and sticker price are all manageable for the sake of STOVL, but the smaller weapons load is not. Drones will do better in just 5 more years.

They should have designed a dedicated version like the Chinese are doing. It was in fact B that limited the F-35's design or it would have turned out to be an even better jet. Spilled milk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Lolwa said:
I hope meteor integration is on the lines. Because we could combine the capabilities of the F-35 ADIR and the European f-35's(especially british & italian f-35's. The British f-35's are similarly spec'd to our rafales too.
I hope the Americans are not too paranoid. Let's see...
Click to expand...

All F-35s have a common base, so a weapon integrated in one jet can be used in others too. And the F-35 will come with European weapons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YoungWolf and Lolwa
randomradio said:
Never. The choice was between Patriot/THAAD combo and S-400
Click to expand...
No. It was the IAF that first made a pitch for THAAD to the Obama administration. They didn't approve of it and from then on the IAF pursued S-400.

Trump might have been more agreeable (he cleared the sale of armed MQ-9B, after all) on THAAD and F-35 but the IAF wasn't in the mood. Knowing full well that S-400 would complicate the odds of getting F-35 in the future.

Turkey's example was there for all to see but yet the IAF closed the door on the F-35/THAAD. Personally, I think we could have waited a bit longer on S-400 since MRSAM deliveries were getting started and Kusha would have arrived sooner than later as it essentially is an Akash-NG follow-on.

[/URL]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kiduva21
randomradio said:
Yep, and that's a good decision. The C is defintiely a winner in comparison.

Sure, the F-35 is better than the Chicom Flanker, but it needs to be compared with upcoming Chinese jets like the J-35 and possibly J-50.



The main issue with the B is the smaller IWB. The shorter combat radius, lower TWR and performance, more maintenance and sticker price are all manageable for the sake of STOVL, but the smaller weapons load is not. Drones will do better in just 5 more years.

They should have designed a dedicated version like the Chinese are doing. It was in fact B that limited the F-35's design or it would have turned out to be an even better jet. Spilled milk.
Click to expand...
To be fair, the F-35B has basically allowed many nations to have light carriers that would otherwise have no naval aviation. It's extremely flexible. The added cost of each F-35B is replaced by savings of not needing cats/traps and making all these LHDs dual use light carriers. The F-35C is obviously more capable.

I di think navies will move towards 076 style LHDs as emals becomes more mature and starts proliferation. Its really a great concept.

Would be funny to see cross decking between stobar and catobar carriers.

Can either variant fit on the elevators of Vikrant/Vikramaditya?
 
Last edited:
Ginvincible said:
To be fair, the F-35B has basically allowed many nations to have light carriers that would otherwise have no naval aviation. It's extremely flexible. The added cost of each F-35B is replaced by savings of not needing cats/traps and making all these LHDs dual use light carriers. The F-35C is obviously more capable.

I di think navies will move towards 076 style LHDs as emals becomes more mature and starts proliferation. Its really a great concept.

Would be funny to see cross decking between stobar and catobar carriers.

Can either variant fit on the elevators of Vikrant/Vikramaditya?
Click to expand...
The f-35's are only slightly bigger(bulkier) than the f-16. They are smaller than the super hornets so most likely would fit in the vikramditya's lift. We could build mistrals and put f-35B's too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kiduva21
I can't help but think that a F-35 would be about as useful to us as the INS Jalashwa has been to the Navy. The ship is largely a showpiece, barely ever sent out for joint exercises or HADR missions, let alone combat ops.

Today the current govt. in India has a good equation with the current govt. in US. That won't remain the case for long. Govt. change all the time. Then there are integration issues, compatibility issues, spares & consumable supply issues. I just don't see how this is a good deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paro
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom