India May Expand Su-30MKI Order Beyond 272

[MilSpec]

Hehe, I also hope that we both stick around here for quiet some time, but the "wishes" about 300+ MKIs should be based on more than just some theories of the media, or personal likes and dislikes for a fighter.
I like the MKI too and will continue to show all those that want Su 35s, what we already have with the MKI and what we can get with the upgrades. But the fact remains, that IAF and MoD had several reasons why they wanted MMRCA and not simply more MKIs, just like we already know when the MKI production at HAL is meant to end of for what reasons. So we can't simply ignore these facts, only because we like the MKI!

Beforehand- I love the MKI (and the mig 29), and everything about it.
This is how is see it. MMRCA has it's own place, these are sophisticated omni role a/c which are farther from integration into the ranks, sqdn leaders and GC's are haven't had first hand experiences on them and once they do I am sure it will be the mirage love story all over again.. In the mean time, India needs additional offensive assets, given the limited options extending MKI orders gives IAF the flexibility it needs especially to augment 29's in air superiority roles, with the swing role capability to move into cabbage cutter role in the north. MKI's also provide a peace of mind when deployed in the maritime role. The entire brahmos integration is of lesser interest to me, I am more interested in the brahmos 2- mini version, our la-kh35 mini moskit take on brahmos will be very interesting to see. In the mean while if MKI numbers goes beyond 300, i am still expecting a nice bottle of scotch.

 

[Tshering22]

Having more MKIs in these economic conditions is going to be quite expensive. What we need is a single engine modern multirole jet that can take on the mission at half the operating and maintenance cost. Tejas is what fits the bill but HAL is as usual screwing it up with their 9-5 work.

Sukhois are awesome... but we must also realize that we need more hours on these with pilots than more jets lying on the tarmac half the time.

If we desire to have a 450 Flanker fleet, then we need an economy that can take such a strain. Simply rampant ordering of MKIs to fill babu pockets won't do.

Also, MiG-21 cannot be replaced with MKIs. That's the point of spending millions on Tejas.

 

[sancho]

In the mean time, India needs additional offensive assets, given the limited options extending MKI orders gives IAF the flexibility it needs especially to augment 29's in air superiority roles, with the swing role capability to move into cabbage cutter role in the north. MKI's also provide a peace of mind when deployed in the maritime role. The entire brahmos integration is of lesser interest to me, I am more interested in the brahmos 2- mini version, our la-kh35 mini moskit take on brahmos will be very interesting to see. In the mean while if MKI numbers goes beyond 300, i am still expecting a nice bottle of scotch.

You are misinterpreting the situation! Yes there is a lack of offensive capabilities and yes there is a need to augment certain roles, but not with additional MKIs, but IN ADDITION TO MKI!
The upgrade of the Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 are offering exactly what you want, they add offensive capabilities to IAF, in different roles and in addition to the MKI and it's capability. The whole talk about Brahmos addition is hyped and makes people to overlook, that there are hardly other important weapons added to the MKI. The plan as far as we know is, to add Astra and Sudharshan to replace Russian weapons, but nothing crucial that would make it more capable in new roles. On the other side, the Mirage 2000s gets SPICE 2000, heavy stand off weaponary (I am disappointed though that Scalp wasn't added yet). Why are there no SPICE 2000 or even better SPICE 1000s to replace Russian bombs, while giving far more stand off strike capability?
And even worse is the comparison to the Mig 29UPG, that "was" only useful for air superiority as you stated, but now will augment the MKIs in SEAD with Kh 31, in CAS with Kh 29 and KAB 500 and even will complement the MKI in maritime attack roles with the Kh 35 (that the MKI doesn't have yet) and that offers not only a far more cost-effective, but also more versatile anti ship option, since not every naval target requires a Brahmos or Brahmos M (see the discussion on anti ship missiles here:
Indian Navy News & Discussions | Page 199
so the Mig gets far more offensive capabilities than the MKI with the upgrade and will add far more roles to IAF's tactics, in addtion to the limitations they had till now with basically only the MKI as a multi role fighter.

Rafale in this case is a whole different issue, since it's on the one side a medium class fighter with similar roles as the Migs, quick reaction interception, CAS, anti ship..., but because of it's high capability, it adds even in roles deep strike or air superiority roles, that the MKI currently occupies (mini AWACS = long range detection capability, that can be diverted to other IAF assets, high maneuverability, AAM loads and endurance, heavy and cruise missile strike capability...).
So while IAF is increasing it's offensive capabilities besides the MKI, by crucial upgrades of the Mig 29s and M2Ks, the Rafale will once again push the capability to another level and actually gives IAF an equally capable alternative to the MKI too, although that wasn't the intention of the MMRCA and that is what IAF will love the Rafale for. They won't be dependent on the MKI alone, not on Russian weapons alone, will be far more flexible when it comes to tactics, offensive and defensive capabilities and that at most likely less operational costs and maintenance problems (lets ignore the industrial side of the competition for a moment).
Additional MKIs would only mean a higher number of the same fighter and the same capabilties, but no benefits in tactics..., while remaining with the same downsides too (costs, reliability, dependence on a single type of fighter). And to make you understand that this is not only a pro Rafale statement, I am still for 40 x of early Pak Fa from Russia (although IAF rejected them), instead of the 40 (+2) x additional MKIs from HAL, because they actually would add more offensive capabilities to IAF, would give them a new topline fighter next to the MKI, just like the Rafale would be, just with even more capabilities. So any fighter that makes IAF better, NEXT to the MKI and it's capabilities should be welcomed, while blindly adding MKIs for the sole reason that it is a good fighter doesn't make IAF better.

 

[MilSpec]

You are misinterpreting the situation! Yes there is a lack of offensive capabilities and yes there is a need to augment certain roles, but not with additional MKIs, but IN ADDITION TO MKI!
The upgrade of the Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 are offering exactly what you want, they add offensive capabilities to IAF, in different roles and in addition to the MKI and it's capability. The whole talk about Brahmos addition is hyped and makes people to overlook, that there are hardly other important weapons added to the MKI. The plan as far as we know is, to add Astra and Sudharshan to replace Russian weapons, but nothing crucial that would make it more capable in new roles. On the other side, the Mirage 2000s gets SPICE 2000, heavy stand off weaponary (I am disappointed though that Scalp wasn't added yet). Why are there no SPICE 2000 or even better SPICE 1000s to replace Russian bombs, while giving far more stand off strike capability?
And even worse is the comparison to the Mig 29UPG, that "was" only useful for air superiority as you stated, but now will augment the MKIs in SEAD with Kh 31, in CAS with Kh 29 and KAB 500 and even will complement the MKI in maritime attack roles with the Kh 35 (that the MKI doesn't have yet) and that offers not only a far more cost-effective, but also more versatile anti ship option, since not every naval target requires a Brahmos or Brahmos M (see the discussion on anti ship missiles here:
Indian Navy News & Discussions | Page 199
so the Mig gets far more offensive capabilities than the MKI with the upgrade and will add far more roles to IAF's tactics, in addtion to the limitations they had till now with basically only the MKI as a multi role fighter.

Rafale in this case is a whole different issue, since it's on the one side a medium class fighter with similar roles as the Migs, quick reaction interception, CAS, anti ship..., but because of it's high capability, it adds even in roles deep strike or air superiority roles, that the MKI currently occupies (mini AWACS = long range detection capability, that can be diverted to other IAF assets, high maneuverability, AAM loads and endurance, heavy and cruise missile strike capability...).
So while IAF is increasing it's offensive capabilities besides the MKI, by crucial upgrades of the Mig 29s and M2Ks, the Rafale will once again push the capability to another level and actually gives IAF an equally capable alternative to the MKI too, although that wasn't the intention of the MMRCA and that is what IAF will love the Rafale for. They won't be dependent on the MKI alone, not on Russian weapons alone, will be far more flexible when it comes to tactics, offensive and defensive capabilities and that at most likely less operational costs and maintenance problems (lets ignore the industrial side of the competition for a moment).
Additional MKIs would only mean a higher number of the same fighter and the same capabilties, but no benefits in tactics..., while remaining with the same downsides too (costs, reliability, dependence on a single type of fighter). And to make you understand that this is not only a pro Rafale statement, I am still for 40 x of early Pak Fa from Russia (although IAF rejected them), instead of the 40 (+2) x additional MKIs from HAL, because they actually would add more offensive capabilities to IAF, would give them a new topline fighter next to the MKI, just like the Rafale would be, just with even more capabilities. So any fighter that makes IAF better, NEXT to the MKI and it's capabilities should be welcomed, while blindly adding MKIs for the sole reason that it is a good fighter doesn't make IAF better.

agreed... but not much choice here, with rafale deliveries delayed, PMF FGFA delayed, and 27's Dare 3 with issues unknown to me, MKI is a valid choice. Right now, apart from rafale, and Pakfa, commissioning, MKI is a simple out of the box jugaad, for force projection, thus I think it will exceed the numbers.

Next reason, is the sqdn strength publicized in last decade is no longer valid, even though the tech in higer end spectrum has increased it has in now way reduced the requirements, and thus along Mk2 and Rafale, there will still remain a massive gap in the offensive capabilities, where MKI can fit very well in my opinion.
My magic number is 340, and it is based especially on the overhaul spectrum which will keep about 15-20 units every year out of action. along with that, 14 specialised ew units and C&C units. lets see if it goes to that.

Having more MKIs in these economic conditions is going to be quite expensive. What we need is a single engine modern multirole jet that can take on the mission at half the operating and maintenance cost. Tejas is what fits the bill but HAL is as usual screwing it up with their 9-5 work.

Sukhois are awesome... but we must also realize that we need more hours on these with pilots than more jets lying on the tarmac half the time.

If we desire to have a 450 Flanker fleet, then we need an economy that can take such a strain. Simply rampant ordering of MKIs to fill babu pockets won't do.

Also, MiG-21 cannot be replaced with MKIs. That's the point of spending millions on Tejas.

MK2 will eventually be inducted in larger numbers with rafale holding up the other end of the spectrum. But due to strategic requirements we will still face massive gaps in the requirement, and MKI provides a straight off the shelf, ready to go solution when it comes to strategic projections. With either sides of the border escalating thier platforms, MKI is provides us a good solution.

 

[MilSpec]

@sancho , when I say augument fulcrums, I dont mean in ground attach seq, but in air sup roles itself. IAF traditionally has placed it's best ACM pilots in Mig 29, but I hear off late, they have put in mixed Flankers and Fulrcums in Tacde programs and results have been very impressive.
Another thing to note Su30, Mig29's and Mirgae 2000's under the skin all were optimized to be air sup fighters, and on a blink of the eye can shed all their fancy a2g stuff and get back in the game.... today multi/omnirole is the way the go, but when it comes to strike packages, the 55 odd Mig29's are not enough for CAP and Air sup cover, thus we specifically nees additional platforms for the intended role and training. MKI's currently provide that capability without any hesitation better than any other platform. When the Aesa upgrades come, which will definitely come as the MLU for the units, dedicated MKI for air sup missions will be a common sight.

 

[sancho]

agreed... but not much choice here, with rafale deliveries delayed, PMF FGFA delayed, and 27's Dare 3 with issues unknown to me, MKI is a valid choice.

It's not, check the time frames:

- 2014 start of LCA MK1 delivery, next to MKI production
- 2016/17 start of Rafale delivery, next to MKI and LCA production
- 2019 start of LCA MK2 delivery, next to Rafale production
- 2020 start of FGFA delivery, next to LCA and Rafale production

So we basically will induct at least 2 types of fighters at the same time for the next 10 years and that even without without extending the MKI production beyond 2019. The fixing of the Rafale deal is delayed, the production of the fighters for 2016 has already started and even the LCA MK1s we induct this year, will offer similar strike capability as the Mig 27s and Jags.
So there is neither a numerical, nor a technical need that additional MKIs would cover, we only would keep adding a fighter because HAL can, but we made the same mistake with the Jags and the fact that we have to keep operating them till 2038 should be a lesson!

Next reason, is the sqdn strength publicized in last decade is no longer valid, even though the tech in higer end spectrum has increased it has in now way reduced the requirements

The squadron strength was always a fake figure, because it just counted the basic number of fighters, not including what fighters they are and for what roles:

3 x Mig 29 squads
3 x M2K squads
6 x Jaguar squads
14 x MKI squads
2 x LCA MK1 squads
4 x LCA MK2 squads (at least HAL still aims for induuction of them within this timeframe)
7 x Rafale squads (planned to be delivered till 2021)
1-2 x FGFA squads
=> 40 to 41 squads (not included additional LCA MK2s, Rafales, or even the 2 x upgraded Mig 27 squads, that might remain in reserve, since the initially were planned to be used till 2025 as well).

The planned 42 squads in 2022 is still possible, but apart of the plain paper figure one has to understand that that that will be at least 34 x squads of multi role fighters and only 6 x strike fighter squads left. Today the IAF counts only around 10 to 13 x multi role squads, while 2/3 of the fleet is filled with dedicated A2A or A2G roles only. That means that IAF by 2022 with not only have 3 x times more numbers of multi role fighters, but will be far more capable to do A2A and A2G roles, since the fighters are far more capable than the current fleet. A single multi role squad basically replaces 2 x older Mig squads in capability and to do it's roles, since more fighters can be diverted to dedicated roles and less fighters are needed to fulfill certain missions.

So when we take the hype about the basic squadron figure out, we see that IAF will be far more capable by 2022 than today and that even if there would be less numbers of squadrons!

but when it comes to strike packages, the 55 odd Mig29's are not enough for CAP and Air sup cover

As explained above, you have to keep in mind that you can do the same missions that IAF did in Kargil, today with less numbers of fighters. A typical strike mission of M2Ks back than included 8 x fighters with strike configs (9 bombs) and some escorts + additional Mig 29s as top cover. Replace the Migs with MKIs today and count in the fact that a single upgraded Mig 29 can carry 2 x bombs, 2 fuel tanks, an LDP and still a full set of 4 x BVR and WVR missiles => half the number of fighters needed to do the same in an even more capable way!

I once posted how the IAF strike capability might look by 2015 after the upgrades and with the arrival of Rafales, today we must say in 2017, but the capabilities itself are the same and impressive even with falling squad numbers on paper!

Indian Air Force News & Discussions | Page 129

 

[Yeti]

I agree with Sancho more of the same does not give us much of a tactical advantage other than a numerical one in numbers. What we need is a different type of fighter that can work together with the MKI and the Mirages, I still feel the Rafale is best placed to fill this role and it will be interesting to see the Garuda exercise in June where the Rafale will be further analysed.

 

[Harisudan]

It should be with low RCS and new high power fuel efficient engine. It must have top in the class top in class EW siult and air to air missile developed for PAKFA which will not only shoot enemy planes but missiles fired by enemy planes. It should have AESA radar. It should be equipped with mini brahmos and K100 to shoot enemy AWACS.

Some of the MKIs are already kept for that role..Right now, RVV and Kh-100 Novator developed missile are equipped in it..
The 14 sqns of MKIs are catered for various roles..The Airchief was optimistic because, the ability of MKIs Multi role functioning have impressed everybody and even if MMRCA deal is cancelled and more MKIs are developed in India, Airchief won't be too sad, because he knows what MKI is capable of..

I would rather select su-35 for the rcs and engine reasons rather than upgrading all the mki's.

The last 80 or so planes should have been su-35,172 mki and 100 su-35 would have been an awesome mix

Hi,
Su-35s are good but MKIs are not far behind and the amount of Indian stuffs incorporated inside, It could even better Su-35s in many areas..
That's why Airforce is not straight away going for MKI upgradatioin into Super MKIs and not su-35s straight away..
Because upgraded super sukhois will be far ahead of su-35s in terms of Indian requirements..

 

[Harisudan]

To all of those here, The Internal top sources in HAL says that, the HAL and IAF chaps are not at all happy regarding the MMRCA TOT discussions and that they even feel that it may even get cancelled under the clauses provided in the agreement which was mutually accepted during the field trials stage, which now French company Dassault is failing to fulfil..Especially the technology regarding Single crystal blade manufacturing..Hence it is fingers crossed for Rafale and Hence IAF has finally come up with brisk plans for creating LCA sqaudrons considering its current performance trials..

 

[arp2041]

Count will go around 400.

545 is a nice number.

 

[rcrmj]

this makes way more sense than those illusions of Rafale, Pak-fa and AMCA projects

 

[arp2041]

this makes way more sense than those illusions of Rafale, Pak-fa and AMCA projects

Even Su-30MKIs were ILLUSIONS before they actually joined the service.

 

[rcrmj]

Even Su-30MKIs were ILLUSIONS before they actually joined the service.

no, it served well in IA and its viable and reliable
but
Rafale: pricey and god know when the deal will conclude
Pak-fa: watered down version of 4.5gen upgrade aka T-50
AMCA: announcing plasma star-battleship project will be more sensational than this one

 

[The A-5]

PSG says 312 MKIs.

 

[danger007]

no, it served well in IA and its viable and reliable
but
Rafale: pricey and god know when the deal will conclude
Pak-fa: watered down version of 4.5gen upgrade aka T-50
AMCA: announcing plasma star-battleship project will be more sensational than this one

PAK-FA Isn't 4.5 gen ... stop overestimating your self ... J -20 isn't rolled out yet... Russians got decades of experience in making jets.. don't forget most of your jets copied version of Russian's. ..