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

[Gautam]

Dangled For 20 Years, F-35 Officially ‘Offered’ To India

February 14, 2025 / By Team Livefist

AI image by Grok

When President Donald Trump declared yesterday that the U.S. was “paving the way to ultimately provide India the F-35 stealth fighters”, he changed two decades of history in the India-US defence trade. The F-35 Lightning II, arguably the most advanced tactical fighter aircraft in service, has been ‘sort of’ on the table in discussions between the two governments and militaries since as far back as 2005, but Trump’s words during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit this week and a statement of intent on officially tweaking export rules to clear India as a potential customer of the F-35 are, to be sure, unprecedented steps.

Before we look at what Trump’s ‘offer’ of the F-35 really means — or if it’s an offer at all — let’s quickly rewind to better understand how things got to this point.

Indian ‘interest’ in the F-35 began in 2005 when the Indian Navy sought and received a ‘first level of detail’ presentation on the F-35C carrier version of the jet. In this piece we wrote two years later in 2007, we reported that the Indian Air Force had received a detailed briefing on the aircraft by a Lockheed Martin team on the F-35A air force version of the jet. The American defence contractor was at the time aggressively pushing an upgraded iteration of the F-16 in India’s then nascent but energetic M-MRCA (medium multirole combat aircraft) contest. Fun nugget from that 2007 piece, where we note that Lockheed Martin’s primary reason for the presentations was to persuade the Indian Air Force to buy 126 F-16s, since that was the only logical step towards toward switching to the fifth generation Lockheed Martin F-35 two decades later. Keep those words ‘two decades later’ in mind, we’ll come back to them.

In the same 2007 piece, we had noted, “Speaking of fifth generation, the government has the PAK-FA negotiations on with the Russians, the MCA (the AMCA’s earlier name) with HAL/DRDO and, in time, a Mk-II of the LCA. Where does the F-35 fit into all of that? Or does it?”

Strap in. It gets better.

In 2008, discussions continued with the Indian Air Force and Indian Navy, with more detailed presentations shared and Indian officers were invited to visit and observe the F-35.

In 2010, things moved beyond Powerpoint PPTs with Lockheed Martin officially responding to an Indian Navy request for information (RFI) for deck-based fighters by pitching both the F-35B jump-jet (the U.S. Marine Corps version) and the F-35C carrier version. Lockheed Martin executives in India had even said the company was conducting computer simulations to prove the F-35C was capable of operating off the Indian Navy’s then inbound INS Vikramaditya aircraft carrier’s ski-jump and angled deck (Boeing had been doing the same with its F/A-18 Super Hornet).



In November 2010, a month before India officially entered the Russian PAK-FA/FGFA program, a Lockheed Martin official in India made headlines by scoffing at the upcoming India-Russia fifth generation partnership by declaring, “The fifth generation JV with Russia? Yeah, well all I can say is best of luck with that.”

Prescient words, given that India exited the program in a huff in 2018 after sinking $295 million in the program. You can read all about that program here.

The frequent visits and briefings by top Lockheed Martin officials weren’t a coincidence. There was buzz in expert circles at the time suggesting it was probably prudent for India to scrap the complex M-MRCA effort and simply go in for F-35 fighters. Chatter around such a suggestion got heated enough for the Indian MoD to step in and shut it down by curtly declaring that there was no way India was going to look at another fifth-generation fighter when it had bought into the PAK-FA/FGFA.


Photo: Gagandeep Singh

If anything, this energised buzz around a potential, if oblique, F-35 push towards India. By 2011, it had become clear to Lockheed Martin that its F-16 offering was far from making the M-MRCA cut — something that would eventually push the company to further customise, soup-up and recast its offering to the Indian Air Force as the F-21 nearly a decade later. That year, the Pentagon’s then Under Secretary for Acquisitions (and old India hand) Ashton Carter said, “India is welcome to participate in the F-35 Lightning-II programme and later acquire it.“

Towards the end of 2011, this contributory column in Livefist kicked up a measure of dust and became the centrepoint of another debate over whether the F-35 was a viable option for India. All of that would end in weeks.


Photo: IAF

F-35 chatter subsided in the wake of India’s January 2012 declaration that France’s Rafale had won the M-MRCA contest. The next few years were deeply turbulent. Despite declaring the Rafale winner in the furiously fought global competition, negotiations entered a deep stall over price, effectively freezing the program. With a change of guard in 2014, the new government revisited the M-MRCA, slashed its scope by a third and chose to buy 36 Rafales off the shelf in a 2016 deal from France with no local manufacture component. Those 36 Rafales were delivered between 2019 and 2022. In 2018, India and France began discussions on doubling that order with 36 more Rafales, though that effort was flung onto the backburner in light of ‘Rafale scam’ politics that took centrestage in the 2019 general election in India. Any scam ‘heat’ dissipated quickly after the Narendra Modi government’s even bigger victory in that election, allowing the government to avoid any traditional skittishness when it comes to defence deals with companies that have been in the political spotlight. And that explains why the Rafale is not only a frontline contender for the Indian Air Force’s rebooted M-MRCA — called the MRFA (multirole fighter aircraft) contest — but will literally be the subject of a second deal for fighters in April this year, this time a package of 26 naval variant airframes for the Indian Navy.


F-15EX art

And now, two decades (remember?) after the F-35 was first dangled before India, President Trump officially and specifically put the F-35 on the table. He could have mentioned a host of other kit on offer. But he left that for the written statement and only mentioned the F-35. That means a lot. And yet, it doesn’t. In the best traditions of this space, much is left unsaid, ripe for speculation and analysis. Some thoughts, with all applicable caveats and disclaimers on surprises, compulsions, political process and beyond:

1. The F-35 pitch is Trump powerplay amidst India’s clear and visible air power gap with China in the stealth/fifth generation fighter space. Trump’s advisors may have persuaded him to bring the F-35 out of the shadows and toss it explicitly into official communications during the PM Modi visit in order to settle any lingering doubts about American intent.
2. Trump’s verbal mention of the F-35 doesn’t have an echo in the joint statement. The latter actually goes even further, by saying, “The leaders pledged to accelerate defense technology cooperation across space, air defense, missile, maritime and undersea technologies, with the U.S. announcing a review of its policy on releasing fifth generation fighters and undersea systems to India.”
3. Saying the F-35 will be “ultimately” provided suggests that Trump is merely officially using the “F-35 at the end of the rainbow” lure that has literally been used for two decades (remember?) now. That may mean that the F-35 continues to be dangled, but the real meat of the push remains, in theory, a trinity of US fourth generation jets: the Boeing F-15EX Eagle II, F/A-18 Super Hornet and the Lockheed Martin F-21 in the IAF’s MRFA bid.
4. Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet has now been eliminated in two Indian contests: the M-MRCA and the Indian Navy’s MRCBF (multirole carrier borne fighter) where the Indian Navy chose the Rafale. That latter deal with France is to be signed in April, as previously mentioned. The Super Hornet is therefore not a serious bidder in the MRFA. It’s actually why Boeing decided to push the new F-15EX Eagle II at the IAF.
5. Lockheed Martin’s F-21 has always only had a bit of an outside chance in the contest. Perceptionally, politically and technically (the F-16, after all, was eliminated in the M-MRCA, albeit an earlier version of the jet). But with the F-35 on the table, does Lockheed Martin even need to worry about the F-21’s chances? In a statement following Trump’s words, Lockheed Martin said, “We are encouraged by the recent announcement by President Trump to provide the F-35 to India. We look forward to working closely with both governments on upcoming strategic procurements, including the fighters, Javelin and helicopters that will further empower the Indian Armed Forces with 21st-century security solutions and deterrence capabilities to address their pressing need.”
6. That leaves the F-15EX as perhaps the only one of three American fighter theoretically facing off with the Rafale.
7. The Saab Gripen E and Eurofighter Typhoon stand no real chance in the MRFA consideration. While Saab has, quite remarkably, sustained its campaign, perhaps hoping for an India pulled between the superpowers to take an outside decision. Eurofighter has had no official campaign to speak of since its loss to Rafale in India’s 2012 M-MRCA downselect.
8. Beyond the very necessary questions on whether the F-35 can plug into India’s airpower framework without large-scale changes, whether India is even remotely inclined to change its studies policy of opening its doors to all manner of American military hardware except frontline combat aircraft, the question is what the F-35 pitch really means in the visible future. The Indian External Affairs Ministry has responded to Trump’s F-35 offer by saying., “I don’t think with regard to the acquisition of an advanced aviation platform by India, that process has started as yet. So this is currently something that’s at the stage of a proposal. But I don’t think the formal process in this regard has started as yet.”
9. What seems certain is that Trump’s F-35 ‘offer’ has queered the pitch on India’s immediate airpower procurement efforts. It plonks a big proposal into the proceedings, right around the time the Indian MoD had mandated a senior committee to come up with a clear action plan on how to proceed with (among other things) the MRFA. With the Russian Su-57 offer, an upcoming Modi-Putin summit and Trump’s F-35 pitch, that committee’s work just became exponentially more difficult.
10. Where does this new complexity leave India’s homegrown fighter efforts: specifically the LCA Mk2 and AMCA? Squadron depletion pressures had already made it clear that an import of some kind was likely unavoidable, and that the MRFA would need to happen. The question now is, will the MRFA proceed in its current form, or per force be recast.
11. Should India even see the F-35 other than an aggressive Trump’s muscle flex? If India has carefully avoided American combat fighters for this long, what’s another four years? Given there is evidence that the continuity of the India-US defence trade is no longer bulletproof, should India even consider going down the road or rendering a major chunk of its frontline combat fleet vulnerable to the whims of American politics? This question has existed for two decades. It’s deafeningly loud now.
12. Finally, if all else fails and decides it wants a chunk of stealth fighters from abroad, which way will it go? Or can it live with the gap that currently exists with China through other capabilities means?

Two weeks before Trump’s F-35 offer, we reported that this was very likely what was on his mind.

Amidst the several questions, at least one thing is clear: the ball is now in India’s court.

Dangled For 20 Years, F-35 Officially 'Offered' To India - Livefist

 

[Parthu]

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.

Any purchase of an American 4.5G fighter would be as a political concession, that much is certain.

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.

If we can clear a path to the F-35 without having to buy an American 4.5G OR having to get rid of S-400, that'd be ideal.

But it remains to be seen if that's possible. It would depend on the kind of F-35 that would be offered to us - if it's going to have a significantly different RCS (but still stealthy) compared to the NATO-spec F-35, it's conceivable that they might not let S400 deter the sale.

They're primarily concerned that S400's radars might profile the F-35 in a controlled environment without its Luneburg lenses, and that Russia might extract the signature through a backdoor. A modified-signature F-35 might allay those fears.

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

Nothing is set in stone. Right now they're evolving their requirement toward a 5th gen deck based fighter:



You can't have 5th gen without stealth. You can't have stealth with external weapons. It's like I said...the TEDBF is ill-conceived.

What's more, we need to develop fighters designed for future carriers, not current ones. Because we'll be going CATOBAR in the long-term while TEDBF is optimized for STOBAR.

We need a CATOBAR-focused N-AMCA to enter service 20 years from now. Which means we need to take IN on board as a partner for AMCA Mk-2 from the get go.

In the meantime, F-35B makes the most sense for our current carriers. The only reason we even went through the trouble of adapting Rafale/SH for STOBAR ops was because F-35B wasn't available due to political reasons. But if that condition changes, we need to re-assess. A 5th gen jet would keep the Vikrant & Vikrant-II relevant for a much longer time than Rafale-M or SH can.

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.

Like I said, it would be as a political concession.

You know my opinion on MRFA. I don't think any plane on offer in that competition is suitable for a fight against China.

We need a 5th gen for that fight. Otherwise we'll be outmatched (not just by China but soon by Pak as well). Our own 5G (AMCA) would take too long to come, so in the meantime we need a proven 5G to hold the fort. F-35 is the only proven option.

But if the way to F-35 must pass through a concessionary purchase of something else, then so be it. We're not new to making such purchases. We care about the overall strategic benefit.

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.

The F-35 as it exists is sufficient to deter China & Pak given our geography and the adversary's projected capabilities by the 2030s. The reason it's not enough for the US is because they're too far away. They need a jet with longer legs.

By the time F-35's underpowered engine starts to become a real problem that prevents it from being cutting-edge (2040s), we'll be having the AMCA Mk-2 with the next-gen engines taking over anyway.

F-35 is just a stop-gap. The current variant is sufficient for that role.

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.

Nobody can derail something that was never on the rails to begin with.

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.

Heh.

 

[randomradio]

Dangled For 20 Years, F-35 Officially ‘Offered’ To India

February 14, 2025 / By Team Livefist
View attachment 40604
AI image by Grok

When President Donald Trump declared yesterday that the U.S. was “paving the way to ultimately provide India the F-35 stealth fighters”, he changed two decades of history in the India-US defence trade. The F-35 Lightning II, arguably the most advanced tactical fighter aircraft in service, has been ‘sort of’ on the table in discussions between the two governments and militaries since as far back as 2005, but Trump’s words during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit this week and a statement of intent on officially tweaking export rules to clear India as a potential customer of the F-35 are, to be sure, unprecedented steps.

Before we look at what Trump’s ‘offer’ of the F-35 really means — or if it’s an offer at all — let’s quickly rewind to better understand how things got to this point.

Indian ‘interest’ in the F-35 began in 2005 when the Indian Navy sought and received a ‘first level of detail’ presentation on the F-35C carrier version of the jet. In this piece we wrote two years later in 2007, we reported that the Indian Air Force had received a detailed briefing on the aircraft by a Lockheed Martin team on the F-35A air force version of the jet. The American defence contractor was at the time aggressively pushing an upgraded iteration of the F-16 in India’s then nascent but energetic M-MRCA (medium multirole combat aircraft) contest. Fun nugget from that 2007 piece, where we note that Lockheed Martin’s primary reason for the presentations was to persuade the Indian Air Force to buy 126 F-16s, since that was the only logical step towards toward switching to the fifth generation Lockheed Martin F-35 two decades later. Keep those words ‘two decades later’ in mind, we’ll come back to them.

In the same 2007 piece, we had noted, “Speaking of fifth generation, the government has the PAK-FA negotiations on with the Russians, the MCA (the AMCA’s earlier name) with HAL/DRDO and, in time, a Mk-II of the LCA. Where does the F-35 fit into all of that? Or does it?”

Strap in. It gets better.

In 2008, discussions continued with the Indian Air Force and Indian Navy, with more detailed presentations shared and Indian officers were invited to visit and observe the F-35.

In 2010, things moved beyond Powerpoint PPTs with Lockheed Martin officially responding to an Indian Navy request for information (RFI) for deck-based fighters by pitching both the F-35B jump-jet (the U.S. Marine Corps version) and the F-35C carrier version. Lockheed Martin executives in India had even said the company was conducting computer simulations to prove the F-35C was capable of operating off the Indian Navy’s then inbound INS Vikramaditya aircraft carrier’s ski-jump and angled deck (Boeing had been doing the same with its F/A-18 Super Hornet).

View attachment 40603

In November 2010, a month before India officially entered the Russian PAK-FA/FGFA program, a Lockheed Martin official in India made headlines by scoffing at the upcoming India-Russia fifth generation partnership by declaring, “The fifth generation JV with Russia? Yeah, well all I can say is best of luck with that.”

Prescient words, given that India exited the program in a huff in 2018 after sinking $295 million in the program. You can read all about that program here.

The frequent visits and briefings by top Lockheed Martin officials weren’t a coincidence. There was buzz in expert circles at the time suggesting it was probably prudent for India to scrap the complex M-MRCA effort and simply go in for F-35 fighters. Chatter around such a suggestion got heated enough for the Indian MoD to step in and shut it down by curtly declaring that there was no way India was going to look at another fifth-generation fighter when it had bought into the PAK-FA/FGFA.

View attachment 40605
Photo: Gagandeep Singh

If anything, this energised buzz around a potential, if oblique, F-35 push towards India. By 2011, it had become clear to Lockheed Martin that its F-16 offering was far from making the M-MRCA cut — something that would eventually push the company to further customise, soup-up and recast its offering to the Indian Air Force as the F-21 nearly a decade later. That year, the Pentagon’s then Under Secretary for Acquisitions (and old India hand) Ashton Carter said, “India is welcome to participate in the F-35 Lightning-II programme and later acquire it.“

Towards the end of 2011, this contributory column in Livefist kicked up a measure of dust and became the centrepoint of another debate over whether the F-35 was a viable option for India. All of that would end in weeks.

View attachment 40606
Photo: IAF

F-35 chatter subsided in the wake of India’s January 2012 declaration that France’s Rafale had won the M-MRCA contest. The next few years were deeply turbulent. Despite declaring the Rafale winner in the furiously fought global competition, negotiations entered a deep stall over price, effectively freezing the program. With a change of guard in 2014, the new government revisited the M-MRCA, slashed its scope by a third and chose to buy 36 Rafales off the shelf in a 2016 deal from France with no local manufacture component. Those 36 Rafales were delivered between 2019 and 2022. In 2018, India and France began discussions on doubling that order with 36 more Rafales, though that effort was flung onto the backburner in light of ‘Rafale scam’ politics that took centrestage in the 2019 general election in India. Any scam ‘heat’ dissipated quickly after the Narendra Modi government’s even bigger victory in that election, allowing the government to avoid any traditional skittishness when it comes to defence deals with companies that have been in the political spotlight. And that explains why the Rafale is not only a frontline contender for the Indian Air Force’s rebooted M-MRCA — called the MRFA (multirole fighter aircraft) contest — but will literally be the subject of a second deal for fighters in April this year, this time a package of 26 naval variant airframes for the Indian Navy.

View attachment 40607
F-15EX art

And now, two decades (remember?) after the F-35 was first dangled before India, President Trump officially and specifically put the F-35 on the table. He could have mentioned a host of other kit on offer. But he left that for the written statement and only mentioned the F-35. That means a lot. And yet, it doesn’t. In the best traditions of this space, much is left unsaid, ripe for speculation and analysis. Some thoughts, with all applicable caveats and disclaimers on surprises, compulsions, political process and beyond:

1. The F-35 pitch is Trump powerplay amidst India’s clear and visible air power gap with China in the stealth/fifth generation fighter space. Trump’s advisors may have persuaded him to bring the F-35 out of the shadows and toss it explicitly into official communications during the PM Modi visit in order to settle any lingering doubts about American intent.
2. Trump’s verbal mention of the F-35 doesn’t have an echo in the joint statement. The latter actually goes even further, by saying, “The leaders pledged to accelerate defense technology cooperation across space, air defense, missile, maritime and undersea technologies, with the U.S. announcing a review of its policy on releasing fifth generation fighters and undersea systems to India.”
3. Saying the F-35 will be “ultimately” provided suggests that Trump is merely officially using the “F-35 at the end of the rainbow” lure that has literally been used for two decades (remember?) now. That may mean that the F-35 continues to be dangled, but the real meat of the push remains, in theory, a trinity of US fourth generation jets: the Boeing F-15EX Eagle II, F/A-18 Super Hornet and the Lockheed Martin F-21 in the IAF’s MRFA bid.
4. Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet has now been eliminated in two Indian contests: the M-MRCA and the Indian Navy’s MRCBF (multirole carrier borne fighter) where the Indian Navy chose the Rafale. That latter deal with France is to be signed in April, as previously mentioned. The Super Hornet is therefore not a serious bidder in the MRFA. It’s actually why Boeing decided to push the new F-15EX Eagle II at the IAF.
5. Lockheed Martin’s F-21 has always only had a bit of an outside chance in the contest. Perceptionally, politically and technically (the F-16, after all, was eliminated in the M-MRCA, albeit an earlier version of the jet). But with the F-35 on the table, does Lockheed Martin even need to worry about the F-21’s chances? In a statement following Trump’s words, Lockheed Martin said, “We are encouraged by the recent announcement by President Trump to provide the F-35 to India. We look forward to working closely with both governments on upcoming strategic procurements, including the fighters, Javelin and helicopters that will further empower the Indian Armed Forces with 21st-century security solutions and deterrence capabilities to address their pressing need.”
6. That leaves the F-15EX as perhaps the only one of three American fighter theoretically facing off with the Rafale.
7. The Saab Gripen E and Eurofighter Typhoon stand no real chance in the MRFA consideration. While Saab has, quite remarkably, sustained its campaign, perhaps hoping for an India pulled between the superpowers to take an outside decision. Eurofighter has had no official campaign to speak of since its loss to Rafale in India’s 2012 M-MRCA downselect.
8. Beyond the very necessary questions on whether the F-35 can plug into India’s airpower framework without large-scale changes, whether India is even remotely inclined to change its studies policy of opening its doors to all manner of American military hardware except frontline combat aircraft, the question is what the F-35 pitch really means in the visible future. The Indian External Affairs Ministry has responded to Trump’s F-35 offer by saying., “I don’t think with regard to the acquisition of an advanced aviation platform by India, that process has started as yet. So this is currently something that’s at the stage of a proposal. But I don’t think the formal process in this regard has started as yet.”
9. What seems certain is that Trump’s F-35 ‘offer’ has queered the pitch on India’s immediate airpower procurement efforts. It plonks a big proposal into the proceedings, right around the time the Indian MoD had mandated a senior committee to come up with a clear action plan on how to proceed with (among other things) the MRFA. With the Russian Su-57 offer, an upcoming Modi-Putin summit and Trump’s F-35 pitch, that committee’s work just became exponentially more difficult.
10. Where does this new complexity leave India’s homegrown fighter efforts: specifically the LCA Mk2 and AMCA? Squadron depletion pressures had already made it clear that an import of some kind was likely unavoidable, and that the MRFA would need to happen. The question now is, will the MRFA proceed in its current form, or per force be recast.
11. Should India even see the F-35 other than an aggressive Trump’s muscle flex? If India has carefully avoided American combat fighters for this long, what’s another four years? Given there is evidence that the continuity of the India-US defence trade is no longer bulletproof, should India even consider going down the road or rendering a major chunk of its frontline combat fleet vulnerable to the whims of American politics? This question has existed for two decades. It’s deafeningly loud now.
12. Finally, if all else fails and decides it wants a chunk of stealth fighters from abroad, which way will it go? Or can it live with the gap that currently exists with China through other capabilities means?

Two weeks before Trump’s F-35 offer, we reported that this was very likely what was on his mind.

Amidst the several questions, at least one thing is clear: the ball is now in India’s court.

Dangled For 20 Years, F-35 Officially 'Offered' To India - Livefist

Trump dangling the F-35 is not the same as the previous ones. And 2-3 squadrons will not be a "major chunk."

 

[randomradio]

Any purchase of an American 4.5G fighter would be as a political concession, that much is certain.

It will never happen. Even though political deals are made, it's never done at the cost of operational capabilities. Even a political deal will include a useful capability. The Teens do not qualify for being useful in any capacity.

If we can clear a path to the F-35 without having to buy an American 4.5G OR having to get rid of S-400, that'd be ideal.

But it remains to be seen if that's possible. It would depend on the kind of F-35 that would be offered to us - if it's going to have a significantly different RCS (but still stealthy) compared to the NATO-spec F-35, it's conceivable that they might not let S400 deter the sale.

They're primarily concerned that S400's radars might profile the F-35 in a controlled environment without its Luneburg lenses, and that Russia might extract the signature through a backdoor. A modified-signature F-35 might allay those fears.

The S-400 will not play any real part in negotiations. People will talk about it in the media, but it won't be taken seriously amongst the actual stakeholders.

Nothing is set in stone. Right now they're evolving their requirement toward a 5th gen deck based fighter:

View attachment 40617

The "5th gen" requirement is something akin to a placeholder because 6th gen is not defined yet.

The first two mentioned there seem to be for IAC-3 onwards.

You can't have 5th gen without stealth. You can't have stealth with external weapons. It's like I said...the TEDBF is ill-conceived.

What's more, we need to develop fighters designed for future carriers, not current ones. Because we'll be going CATOBAR in the long-term while TEDBF is optimized for STOBAR.

We need a CATOBAR-focused N-AMCA to enter service 20 years from now. Which means we need to take IN on board as a partner for AMCA Mk-2 from the get go.

TEDBF is not ill-conceived. It's sufficient relative to the capabilities of the carrier. It's not designed to penetrate IADS. The USN is headed in the same direction with F/A-XX.

Future US Navy fighter will not be joint effort with USAF

After developing the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lighting II together, the US Navy (USN) and the US Air Force (USAF) are parting ways.

www.flightglobal.com

The USN’s next-generation fighter won’t be jointly developed with the USAF. That’s because the USN does not plan to use its Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) aircraft on penetration missions in highly-contested air space as the USAF aims to do with its next-generation fighter, says Angie Knappenberger, USN deputy director of air warfare, at the Navy League Sea-Air-Space conference in National Harbor, Maryland.
“A penetrating fighter, the Navy doesn’t have to do that. So some of that inherent design of the aircraft it does drive costs and if you don’t need that for our mission area then you don’t necessarily want to pay for it,” she says, noting the shape of a highly stealthy penetrating fighter, presumably without a vertical stabliser, would be more expensive to develop. Instead, the USN would conduct penetrating airstrikes against an advanced adversary with long-range standoff missiles or the mission would be deferred to the USAF, says Knappenberger.

In the meantime, F-35B makes the most sense for our current carriers. The only reason we even went through the trouble of adapting Rafale/SH for STOBAR ops was because F-35B wasn't available due to political reasons. But if that condition changes, we need to re-assess. A 5th gen jet would keep the Vikrant & Vikrant-II relevant for a much longer time than Rafale-M or SH can.

The F-35B does not fit inside the first 2 carriers, too wide for the elevators. IAC-2 needs modifications for the same.

Like I said, it would be as a political concession.

You know my opinion on MRFA. I don't think any plane on offer in that competition is suitable for a fight against China.

We need a 5th gen for that fight. Otherwise we'll be outmatched (not just by China but soon by Pak as well). Our own 5G (AMCA) would take too long to come, so in the meantime we need a proven 5G to hold the fort. F-35 is the only proven option.

Rafale has been designed for low-altitude penetration.

And, the MKI + Rafale combo will be necessary for air defense. The USAF calls it the thugs and ninjas tactic, where the MKI presents itself as a target while the Rafale stays in ambush waiting for the enemy to go after the MKIs. They will be using the F-15EX and F-22/F-35 for the same.

I'd actually argue that the F-35 is not sufficient for either the air defense mission or penetration mission against modern Chinese fighters and IADS. Hence the American focus on NGAD and B-21. The USN giving up on penetration shows they think not only the F/A-XX but even the F-35C is not suitable.

But if the way to F-35 must pass through a concessionary purchase of something else, then so be it. We're not new to making such purchases. We care about the overall strategic benefit.

A concessionary purchase is expected before the F-35 is actually offered. But it doesn't have to be one of the Teens. There's plenty of other stuff for purchase via nomination instead of touching the tendered stuff.

Apart from repeat orders of the stuff we have ordered since Trump-1, and even Stryker, there's new stuff like FVL and a new heavy stealth transport. The FVL was offered during Trump-1 and V-280 definitely looks interesting. And we are in the market for transports.

The F-35 as it exists is sufficient to deter China & Pak given our geography and the adversary's projected capabilities by the 2030s. The reason it's not enough for the US is because they're too far away. They need a jet with longer legs.

By the time F-35's underpowered engine starts to become a real problem that prevents it from being cutting-edge (2040s), we'll be having the AMCA Mk-2 with the next-gen engines taking over anyway.

F-35 is just a stop-gap. The current variant is sufficient for that role.

The F-35 as it exists today is not sufficient. It definitely needs to start with the engine core upgrade.

Pratt F35 engine upgrade clears preliminary design review

RTX subsidiary Pratt & Whitney has cleared an early design hurdle for a planned upgrade to the F-35’s engine, which the company maintains is “on track” to field by 2029.

portal.ct.gov

An upgrade to the current engine is needed, officials say, due to a cooling problem long known with the F-35. Essentially, the fighter’s engine is being overworked because its cooling system needs to draw more air pressure, known as “bleed air,” from its powerplant than designers originally expected, forcing the engine to run hotter and reducing its lifespan in turn. The upgrade is expected to restore engine life and offer better performance.
A suite of forthcoming upgrades to the plane itself known as Block 4 is expected to turn the F-35’s heat factor even higher and require more cooling as a result. Both Pratt and the F-35 Joint Program Office have said the ECU will not only address the bleed air issue but will fully enable Block 4 capabilities as well. The F-35 program is also planning a separate cooling system upgrade to address needs beyond Block 4.
And the upgrade is necessary to run all B4 capabilities, and the USAF has mentioned multiple times that all B4 capabilities are necessary to deal with China. And we will need the next cooling upgrade too. And even after that, it's not suitable for penetration missions in the long term due to advancements in enemy IADS, the same enemy even we have to fight.

So apart from the engine upgrade, we even need new avionics; a GaN radar in particular.

Based on projections, the computer upgrade will take until 2026, the avionics upgrade will happen a year later. The engine upgrade is expected in 2029, alongside full B4 capabilities, but is unlikely to meet that date given current realities.

A recent Government Accountability Office report raised questions about the timeline for the ECU’s fielding, with the watchdog stating that the F-35 program won’t deliver aircraft with updated engines until 2032. Still, in the time since and in responses to Breaking Defense today, Pratt maintained its goal of fielding the ECU by 2029.

So we need the 2032 F-35 at the bare minimum. And by the time we induct 2 squadrons, say, 2035-37 or so, it needs to have moved on to B5-10, 'cause that's the version we will be aiming for.

And you can be sure the F-35 we will get will come with some downgrades relative to the USAF's version. The US limits processing power to keep export jets less capable than the Five Eyes jets.

Nobody can derail something that was never on the rails to begin with.

Given the reality of the F-35's actual timeline, MRFA will go through. Apart from the fact that the F-35 will not be bought in numbers enough to replace the MRFA, the Americans are not going to offer sufficient ToT even if we did order enough numbers, so it's not gonna be a big program anyway.

The way I believe it's gonna go; MRFA will begin soon, flight testing and shortlist will finish by mid-2027, MoD will pick a winner by the end of 2027 or early 2028, and sign the deal in 2029, ie, after elections. Won't be surprised if it's signed before elections either. If the committee recommends 2 more stopgap Rafales in a month from today, that might happen too. Then MRFA can be pushed behind by another year, so 2026-2030, or maybe not. But MRFA is definitely going through, it has no competition even with the F-35 around.

In the meantime, the MoD will keep pushing the F-35 decision until B4 is ready, which could happen around 2031-32, and then work out whether they still want it or look at something else that's new, when the F-35 will have to compete with later versions of the Felon, the two NGADs, Mig-41, and GCAP. Note that at this point AMCA will be under limited production so DRDO's gonna have a say as well. So even the future of the F-35 in the IAF is suspect due to the delays.

Anyway, I don't believe the F-35 will be competitive relative to adversary capabilities of the time. We will definitely need a better jet.

Otoh, the USAF's NGAD could be exported to control costs.

 

[marich01]

Amidst the several questions, at least one thing is clear: the ball is now in India’s court.

I am sure many in the establishment as well as in media know the situation, that the su-57 related talk has been ongoing with Rus for the past year and even before PM meetings. However they do not want to rush things and certain strategic acquisitions were prioritised that are needed for some of our own programs. Due to election year no visible progress in 2024 but in next 3-4 years time lets see what happens. Obviously USA also know this well hence this supposed " path to offer " like the Nasams 2 deal last time. But just like that time it did not deter the S400 procurement, this pathway will also not deter any future local mfg procurement. In fact this open dialogue is the tangible proof of that imo.

 

[Parthu]

It will never happen. Even though political deals are made, it's never done at the cost of operational capabilities. Even a political deal will include a useful capability. The Teens do not qualify for being useful in any capacity.

They're useful in the same way MRFA is useful - to fill squadron numbers, that's all.

In other words, a waste of money in the grand scheme of things.

The "5th gen" requirement is something akin to a placeholder because 6th gen is not defined yet.

The first two mentioned there seem to be for IAC-3 onwards.

They're the long-term requirements.

Unfortunately, as per current plans TEDBF itself will only arrive by 2038 (round off to 2040 to account for delays). It'll effectively be DOA.

We'd be inducting the equivalent of a 4.5+ gen Rafale F5 at around the same time when the French Navy would be inducting 6th gen NGF for their PANG. Plus, we'd be inducting a new jet that's optimized for STOBAR ops at a time when all our future carriers under construction/planning at the time would be CATOBAR.

Like I said, ill-concieved. Therefore DOA with no future.

TEDBF is not ill-conceived. It's sufficient relative to the capabilities of the carrier. It's not designed to penetrate IADS. The USN is headed in the same direction with F/A-XX.

Future US Navy fighter will not be joint effort with USAF

After developing the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lighting II together, the US Navy (USN) and the US Air Force (USAF) are parting ways.

www.flightglobal.com

The USN’s next-generation fighter won’t be jointly developed with the USAF. That’s because the USN does not plan to use its Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) aircraft on penetration missions in highly-contested air space as the USAF aims to do with its next-generation fighter, says Angie Knappenberger, USN deputy director of air warfare, at the Navy League Sea-Air-Space conference in National Harbor, Maryland.
“A penetrating fighter, the Navy doesn’t have to do that. So some of that inherent design of the aircraft it does drive costs and if you don’t need that for our mission area then you don’t necessarily want to pay for it,” she says, noting the shape of a highly stealthy penetrating fighter, presumably without a vertical stabliser, would be more expensive to develop. Instead, the USN would conduct penetrating airstrikes against an advanced adversary with long-range standoff missiles or the mission would be deferred to the USAF, says Knappenberger.

That doesn't mean F/A-XX is going to be a souped-up SH. It'll still be a VLO aircraft with internal weapons. It still needs to be survivable. If a J-36 can see & shoot it from over 100 kms away, there's no point. Most likely, it'll be stealthier than F-35 in fact.

They just won't make it as stealthy as the NGAD/PCA...because that is so much more stealthier than any fighter that ever flew. If F-22 & F-35 are VLO, then the PCA would be something like ULO, ultra low observable (I'm defining ULO as being able to defeat even longer-wavelength radars).

Additionally, they are constrained with the F/A-XX design because it has to fit in the same spaces on a carrier that F-35/SH operate from, they can't make it as big as the NGAD which means it won't have as much range anyway. If it can't fly far enough to penetrate future Chinese IADS while letting the Carriers stay at a safe enough distance, why bother making it ULO? So VLO is sufficient.

The F-35B does not fit inside the first 2 carriers, too wide for the elevators. IAC-2 needs modifications for the same.

The B's wingspan is shorter than the Rafale-M's.

Rafale has been designed for low-altitude penetration.

Except you aren't dealing with Soviet/Russian air forces of the 90s/00s that had extremely poor look-down capabilities.

Modern radars like what China's got are very well capable of detecting low flying aircraft & missiles. Not to mention, J-20 has ÈOTS.

A concessionary purchase is expected before the F-35 is actually offered. But it doesn't have to be one of the Teens. There's plenty of other stuff for purchase via nomination instead of touching the tendered stuff.

Apart from repeat orders of the stuff we have ordered since Trump-1, and even Stryker, there's new stuff like FVL and a new heavy stealth transport. The FVL was offered during Trump-1 and V-280 definitely looks interesting. And we are in the market for transports.

If we can avoid the Teens and still get the F-35, then great.

The F-35 as it exists today is not sufficient. It definitely needs to start with the engine core upgrade.

Pratt F35 engine upgrade clears preliminary design review

RTX subsidiary Pratt & Whitney has cleared an early design hurdle for a planned upgrade to the F-35’s engine, which the company maintains is “on track” to field by 2029.

portal.ct.gov

An upgrade to the current engine is needed, officials say, due to a cooling problem long known with the F-35. Essentially, the fighter’s engine is being overworked because its cooling system needs to draw more air pressure, known as “bleed air,” from its powerplant than designers originally expected, forcing the engine to run hotter and reducing its lifespan in turn. The upgrade is expected to restore engine life and offer better performance.
A suite of forthcoming upgrades to the plane itself known as Block 4 is expected to turn the F-35’s heat factor even higher and require more cooling as a result. Both Pratt and the F-35 Joint Program Office have said the ECU will not only address the bleed air issue but will fully enable Block 4 capabilities as well. The F-35 program is also planning a separate cooling system upgrade to address needs beyond Block 4.
And the upgrade is necessary to run all B4 capabilities, and the USAF has mentioned multiple times that all B4 capabilities are necessary to deal with China. And we will need the next cooling upgrade too. And even after that, it's not suitable for penetration missions in the long term due to advancements in enemy IADS, the same enemy even we have to fight.

So apart from the engine upgrade, we even need new avionics; a GaN radar in particular.

Based on projections, the computer upgrade will take until 2026, the avionics upgrade will happen a year later. The engine upgrade is expected in 2029, alongside full B4 capabilities, but is unlikely to meet that date given current realities.

A recent Government Accountability Office report raised questions about the timeline for the ECU’s fielding, with the watchdog stating that the F-35 program won’t deliver aircraft with updated engines until 2032. Still, in the time since and in responses to Breaking Defense today, Pratt maintained its goal of fielding the ECU by 2029.

So we need the 2032 F-35 at the bare minimum. And by the time we induct 2 squadrons, say, 2035-37 or so, it needs to have moved on to B5-10, 'cause that's the version we will be aiming for.

And you can be sure the F-35 we will get will come with some downgrades relative to the USAF's version. The US limits processing power to keep export jets less capable than the Five Eyes jets.

USAF is worried about how to keep the F-35 relevant till 2070.

Remember, they're procuring like 2,400+ of them. It's gonna be their main backbone fighter. NGAD is just the silver bullet for long-range, penetrating air dominance. They only plan to buy about 200 of them.

So while these NGADs are busy trying to establish air dominance over mainland China, it's the F-35s that are gonna have to perform air defence over everything from Okinawa to Guam. They need the F-35 to stay relevant for a long time against China. That's what they're worried about.

Our requirement is only till 2045 max. At which point AMCA Mk-2 with 2 x 5th gen engines will be taking over as the frontline fighter. After that we won't care if our small fleet of ~50 F-35s fail to be relevant as frontline fighters. For this timeframe, the F-35's current capabilities are more than sufficient. Even a sub-optimal US engine is far superior to existing or near-future Chinese engines.

In case there's a lack of progress (or cancellation) in AMCA's next-gen engine program, we can always choose to upgrade our F-35s after we buy them (TR-3 is upgradable to Block-4), as and when needed. Or even expand the fleet with additional new-build Block-4+ planes if necessary.

Given the reality of the F-35's actual timeline, MRFA will go through. Apart from the fact that the F-35 will not be bought in numbers enough to replace the MRFA, the Americans are not going to offer sufficient ToT even if we did order enough numbers, so it's not gonna be a big program anyway.

The way I believe it's gonna go; MRFA will begin soon, flight testing and shortlist will finish by mid-2027, MoD will pick a winner by the end of 2027 or early 2028, and sign the deal in 2029, ie, after elections. Won't be surprised if it's signed before elections either. If the committee recommends 2 more stopgap Rafales in a month from today, that might happen too. Then MRFA can be pushed behind by another year, so 2026-2030, or maybe not. But MRFA is definitely going through, it has no competition even with the F-35 around.

In the meantime, the MoD will keep pushing the F-35 decision until B4 is ready, which could happen around 2031-32, and then work out whether they still want it or look at something else that's new, when the F-35 will have to compete with later versions of the Felon, the two NGADs, Mig-41, and GCAP. Note that at this point AMCA will be under limited production so DRDO's gonna have a say as well. So even the future of the F-35 in the IAF is suspect due to the delays.

Anyway, I don't believe the F-35 will be competitive relative to adversary capabilities of the time. We will definitely need a better jet.

Otoh, the USAF's NGAD could be exported to control costs.

Too much conjecture at this point.

As of today, MRFA AoN isn't even on the table yet and an official offer for F-35 has already come. At the very least, it deserves taking a re-look at what we actually need to spend our money on given the timeframes we're looking at, and how adversary capabilities are going to develop in the meantime.

China already operates nearly 200 stealth jets, and Pakistan will be inducting its first by 2027 itself, aiming for a fleet of 50 at least.

We don't plan on F-35 as a long-term capability investment, but merely as a stop-gap, knee-jerk purchase as a result of being outmatched by adversaries in BVR combat. We need it for deterrence above all else. The planes under MRFA cannot provide that deterrence. AMCA can, but it's too far away. Hence, F-35.

In these conditions, waiting for a future variant makes no sense.

 

[randomradio]

I am sure many in the establishment as well as in media know the situation, that the su-57 related talk has been ongoing with Rus for the past year and even before PM meetings. However they do not want to rush things and certain strategic acquisitions were prioritised that are needed for some of our own programs. Due to election year no visible progress in 2024 but in next 3-4 years time lets see what happens. Obviously USA also know this well hence this supposed " path to offer " like the Nasams 2 deal last time. But just like that time it did not deter the S400 procurement, this pathway will also not deter any future local mfg procurement. In fact this open dialogue is the tangible proof of that imo.

The Su-57 is not sufficient either. FGFA was supposed to meet our expectations, it came with a lot of design changes for the penetration mission. The Su-57 has not been built for penetration, the design continues Russia's objective of air denial, just like their navy works for sea denial. Its equivalent is the F/A-XX rather than the NGAD. And the penetration version is some future strike variant like the Su-34 alongside S-70 and a stealth bomber.

The Chinese are advancing way too fast. Even the US is unable to keep up. They showed off the J-36 and J-50, but are yet to show off their next gen ASF and strike jets. So neither the Su-57 nor the F-35 will maintain pace with the upcoming jets in the timeframe we are talking about. It's a pretty ridiculous situation.

 

[marich01]

The Su-57 is not sufficient either.

From the USA pov, or in general two or more competing MIC pov its not about what is sufficient for the customer, rather the opportunity that counts obviously. What suits the customer is entirely the customer side to decide on and let know the vendor via rfp. The insistence on pathway to a specific platform, while other generation of the said platform was acquired and also another is in the active process (naval rafale) show that there is genuine case for acquiring 5th gen jets is building up, formal/informal conversations have taken place and a rival MIC is ahead of USA again while they actively try to wean them off. All these factors combining paint a picture that Govt may OK su57 local mfg like decision concurrently with stryker like local prod deal.

 

[Hydra]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891059116161835086

 

[Lolwa]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891059116161835086

Need to accelerate amca. And purchase f-35 and su-57

 

[randomradio]

They're useful in the same way MRFA is useful - to fill squadron numbers, that's all.

In other words, a waste of money in the grand scheme of things.

The Teens are a generation behind, they are already not relevant.

They're the long-term requirements.

Unfortunately, as per current plans TEDBF itself will only arrive by 2038 (round off to 2040 to account for delays). It'll effectively be DOA.

We'd be inducting the equivalent of a 4.5+ gen Rafale F5 at around the same time when the French Navy would be inducting 6th gen NGF for their PANG. Plus, we'd be inducting a new jet that's optimized for STOBAR ops at a time when all our future carriers under construction/planning at the time would be CATOBAR.

Like I said, ill-concieved. Therefore DOA with no future.

NGF won't happen anytime before 2050. And TEDBF will be a step up over Rafale. Basically a Super Rafale. It will maintain relevance into the 2070s, by which time even Vikrant 2 will be on its last legs. It doesn't have to function to the same level as air force jets after all, it's explained later.

SH and Rafale M will be around until 2055 or so on carriers, and many air forces will continue operating 4th gen designs until the 2080s, and TEDBF will retire before them.

That doesn't mean F/A-XX is going to be a souped-up SH. It'll still be a VLO aircraft with internal weapons. It still needs to be survivable. If a J-36 can see & shoot it from over 100 kms away, there's no point. Most likely, it'll be stealthier than F-35 in fact.

They just won't make it as stealthy as the NGAD/PCA...because that is so much more stealthier than any fighter that ever flew. If F-22 & F-35 are VLO, then the PCA would be something like ULO, ultra low observable (I'm defining ULO as being able to defeat even longer-wavelength radars).

Additionally, they are constrained with the F/A-XX design because it has to fit in the same spaces on a carrier that F-35/SH operate from, they can't make it as big as the NGAD which means it won't have as much range anyway. If it can't fly far enough to penetrate future Chinese IADS while letting the Carriers stay at a safe enough distance, why bother making it ULO? So VLO is sufficient.

At this time, it's unclear if it will be designed with more stealth than necessary.

CNO Greenert: Navy’s Next Fighter Might Not Need Stealth, High Speed - USNI News

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Navy’s planned next generation fighter will likely rely less on the speed and stealth that has defined the current generation of U.S. tactical aircraft and could feature an unmanned option, the Chief of Naval Operations said on Wednesday. CNO Adm. Jonathan Greenert...

news.usni.org

As for range, its expected to have far more range than the F-35C, so it's likely to be competitive with NGAD. So range isn't reason enough because once NGAD defeats enemy IADS, the F/A-XX will have to start hitting targets deep inside China. So both are expected to have more than 1000 nmi radius of action, with both powered by the same engine. If NGAD drops down to just one engine, then it will lose out on range.

So the same arguments are valid for TEDBF. Less focus on stealth, more on range and weapons. Stealth can come with drones anyway.

The B's wingspan is shorter than the Rafale-M's.

Rafale M is at 9.7 m or so versus 10.7. Rafale climbs to 10.9 with all the extra removable stuff on the tips. The French may further redesign the wingtips to fit into Vikrant's 10 m lifts.

Except you aren't dealing with Soviet/Russian air forces of the 90s/00s that had extremely poor look-down capabilities.

Modern radars like what China's got are very well capable of detecting low flying aircraft & missiles. Not to mention, J-20 has ÈOTS.

It will be very difficult to pick up the Rafale via RF means. And radar is necessary at such low altitude, IR is insufficient, especially with the aircraft just spiting out 50-60 kN of thrust in total.

USAF is worried about how to keep the F-35 relevant till 2070.

Remember, they're procuring like 2,400+ of them. It's gonna be their main backbone fighter. NGAD is just the silver bullet for long-range, penetrating air dominance. They only plan to buy about 200 of them.

So while these NGADs are busy trying to establish air dominance over mainland China, it's the F-35s that are gonna have to perform air defence over everything from Okinawa to Guam. They need the F-35 to stay relevant for a long time against China. That's what they're worried about.

Our requirement is only till 2045 max. At which point AMCA Mk-2 with 2 x 5th gen engines will be taking over as the frontline fighter. After that we won't care if our small fleet of ~50 F-35s fail to be relevant as frontline fighters. For this timeframe, the F-35's current capabilities are more than sufficient. Even a sub-optimal US engine is far superior to existing or near-future Chinese engines.

In case there's a lack of progress (or cancellation) in AMCA's next-gen engine program, we can always choose to upgrade our F-35s after we buy them (TR-3 is upgradable to Block-4), as and when needed. Or even expand the fleet with additional new-build Block-4+ planes if necessary.

If all the F-35 can do is air defense today, then we don't need it. Even LCA Mk1A can perform air defense against stealth jets when combined with AWACS, the same as the F-35. Due to cooperative targeting techniques, passive stealth has become much easier to defeat.

The F-35 needs the engine upgrade to actually become functional and the Su-57 needs to undergo the next evolution. These are the bare minimums to even function as stopgaps. That's why both are post-2030 options.

Too much conjecture at this point.

As of today, MRFA AoN isn't even on the table yet and an official offer for F-35 has already come. At the very least, it deserves taking a re-look at what we actually need to spend our money on given the timeframes we're looking at, and how adversary capabilities are going to develop in the meantime.

China already operates nearly 200 stealth jets, and Pakistan will be inducting its first by 2027 itself, aiming for a fleet of 50 at least.

We don't plan on F-35 as a long-term capability investment, but merely as a stop-gap, knee-jerk purchase as a result of being outmatched by adversaries in BVR combat. We need it for deterrence above all else. The planes under MRFA cannot provide that deterrence. AMCA can, but it's too far away. Hence, F-35.

In these conditions, waiting for a future variant makes no sense.

There is no official F-35 offer, it's yet to come. What Trump said is "ultimately" offer it in time. The target is obviously the Teens for MRFA, so that path is not workable. Even Trump believes in the MRFA.

The IAF does not agree with your assessment that MRFA cannot provide deterrence. If the committee recommends buying stopgap Rafales before MRFA, the F4 will be more than sufficient to deter PAF's J-35s, and also upgrade F3Rs to F4 while awaiting MRFA deliveries. So just one of these options will be taken up within this decade no matter how much the Russians and Americans push for a deal for their own respective jets.

The answer will come in just a month.

 

[randomradio]

From the USA pov, or in general two or more competing MIC pov its not about what is sufficient for the customer, rather the opportunity that counts obviously. What suits the customer is entirely the customer side to decide on and let know the vendor via rfp. The insistence on pathway to a specific platform, while other generation of the said platform was acquired and also another is in the active process (naval rafale) show that there is genuine case for acquiring 5th gen jets is building up, formal/informal conversations have taken place and a rival MIC is ahead of USA again while they actively try to wean them off. All these factors combining paint a picture that Govt may OK su57 local mfg like decision concurrently with stryker like local prod deal.

FGFA was called PMF in Russia, it came with quite a bit of design changes to the inlets, wings, and control surfaces to make it compatible for multirole ops compared to Russia's air defense role. It came in single and twin-seat versions.

The Russians are developing a two-seat Su-57 that's much more compatible with the IAF's requirements, as per the Russians. So they might push for the vanilla Su-57 now, but the next variant will be far more suitable. If MRFA is canceled for a large number of Su-57, then it would make sense to just import 40 vanillas and build the two-seat version in large numbers.

But I don't think Russia is politically tenable when we are in the process of acquiring engine tech from the West. So the likelihood of the above is pretty much zero. And by the time we get the tech, our dependency on Russia in most areas would have disappeared. Hell, we would have our own SSN in the water by then.

And the entire goal of a stopgap is to assume that Rafales are not good enough, and we need to plug the gap between LCA and AMCA to ensure the PAF do not have an advantage until 2040. If the Rafales are good enough, then this is all moot to begin with.

 

[randomradio]

Former ACM Chaudhari practically dismisses the F-35.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891076326066733456

 

[Innominate]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891059116161835086

So IAF pretty much said F trying to at least compete with PLAAF and just focus on Pakistanis? That's not good.

 

[Hydra]

Former ACM Chaudhari practically dismisses the F-35.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1891076326066733456

Old school, still living in Russian lala land.

 

[Hydra]

Need to accelerate amca. And purchase f-35 and su-57

No amount of convincing effort is enough me to accept that poorly designed Russian jet, reason is 1) we already backed of from that project earlier. I trust IAF here. 2) The perfomance of Russian weapon in Ukraine, by the original user Russia itself.

As i said earlier, the only russian weapon worth purchase is upcoming MIG 41 or existing MIG 31, and a TOT of AL51 engine.

 

[Lolwa]

No amount of convincing effort is enough me to accept that poorly designed Russian jet, reason is 1) we already backed of from that project earlier. I trust IAF here. 2) The perfomance of Russian weapon in Ukraine, by the original user Russia itself.

As i said earlier, the only russian weapon worth purchase is upcoming MIG 41 or existing MIG 31, and a TOT of AL51 engine.

The su-57 has the longest A2a kill right now at 217km using r-37m. There's lot of potential to russian weapons.

 

[Parthu]

The Teens are a generation behind, they are already not relevant.

That applies to all MRFA contenders in their current forms.

Relevant as support aircraft & number-fillers yes, but not as frontline fighters against China in the 2030s.

And TEDBF will be a step up over Rafale. Basically a Super Rafale.

It's a Rafale+ if you're talking about F4. Talking about F5, it's gonna be a pretty even match tech-wise. But it's gonna be coming about a decade after F5 does, so not really relevant.

SH and Rafale M will be around until 2055 or so on carriers, and many air forces will continue operating 4th gen designs until the 2080s, and TEDBF will retire before them.

NGF will be the main fighter on the PANG, Rafale will just be holding the fort until it comes. After that it'll be relegated to secondary duties against low-intensity threats (kinda like Super Etendard was to Rafale), eventually NGF will replace it completely.

But if we go with TEDBF in its current form, we'll be a generation behind major navies of the day by mid-century. This won't be acceptable. IN isn't stupid, they won't buy TEDBF in its current form. They need a 5th gen platform minimum.

You're just reading too much into a very early iteration of the requirement.

At this time, it's unclear if it will be designed with more stealth than necessary.

CNO Greenert: Navy’s Next Fighter Might Not Need Stealth, High Speed - USNI News

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Navy’s planned next generation fighter will likely rely less on the speed and stealth that has defined the current generation of U.S. tactical aircraft and could feature an unmanned option, the Chief of Naval Operations said on Wednesday. CNO Adm. Jonathan Greenert...

news.usni.org

As for range, its expected to have far more range than the F-35C, so it's likely to be competitive with NGAD. So range isn't reason enough because once NGAD defeats enemy IADS, the F/A-XX will have to start hitting targets deep inside China. So both are expected to have more than 1000 nmi radius of action, with both powered by the same engine. If NGAD drops down to just one engine, then it will lose out on range.

So the same arguments are valid for TEDBF. Less focus on stealth, more on range and weapons. Stealth can come with drones anyway.

You're using one non-finalized design requirement to extrapolate another non-finalized design requirement. A futile exercise.

Rafale M is at 9.7 m or so versus 10.7. Rafale climbs to 10.9 with all the extra removable stuff on the tips. The French may further redesign the wingtips to fit into Vikrant's 10 m lifts.

I stand corrected.

But F-35C with foldable wings can be an option.

It will be very difficult to pick up the Rafale via RF means. And radar is necessary at such low altitude, IR is insufficient, especially with the aircraft just spiting out 50-60 kN of thrust in total.

Not a problem when the background is just a cold desert like Ladakh/Tibetan plateau.

If all the F-35 can do is air defense today, then we don't need it. Even LCA Mk1A can perform air defense against stealth jets when combined with AWACS, the same as the F-35. Due to cooperative targeting techniques, passive stealth has become much easier to defeat.

It can do much more than air defence today and into the early 2040s. It's the longevity that'll be a problem unless it gets the ECU upgrade.

But like I said, we can always upgrade later. We need 5th gens ASAP.

There is no official F-35 offer, it's yet to come. What Trump said is "ultimately" offer it in time. The target is obviously the Teens for MRFA, so that path is not workable. Even Trump believes in the MRFA.

The political approval for access has been given. As of now it's still in a proposal stage like the Foreign Secretary said.

But knowing that this option exists, we'll have to take it into account going forward.

 

[Hydra]

The su-57 has the longest A2a kill right now at 217km using r-37m. There's lot of potential to russian weapons.

Against 4th gen aircraft, right? That can be acheived with even su30MKI if conditions favours. Thimg is what SU57 will do against J20,later will detect su57 earlier & may get a kill.

 

[Ashwin]

India may take Rafale route to buy US' F35 fighter jets: Govt likely to opt for limited numbers; may require special monitoring clauses

India is considering the acquisition of F35 fighter jets from the US, similar to its Rafale deal with France. The deal will likely be government-to-government with strict US technology safeguards. Limited numbers of F35s might serve as a stop-gap until India's Advanced Multirole Combat Aircraft...

t.co