Indian Airforce MMRCA + LWF Alternate Discussion

[MilSpec]

Hey Guys,



Starting a thread to discuss a few other angles of MMRCA (the original contenders) and what I categorize as the LWF (LCAMK2, F16IN, Gripen NG) just as a discussion exercise. This does not reflect any internal information on things that are in store and purely is for just exploring alternatives.

MMRCA > if a new LWF is selected:

Knowing that direct procurement of Rafales is now about 2 squadrons and local MFG in the works

Case I> Assume that India does sign up for the F16IN -Super Viper in it's LWF program. Would it still make sense to select Rafale local production of 8 squadrons, or would you prefer a different Fighter to compliment the f16 IN?

Case II> What if Gripen NG is selected as a Second Parallel Platform to LCA Mk2, would that effect the MMRCA numbers if given a choice.

Case III> F16in and Gripen both are rejected, and LCA Mk2 is the only platform for LWF. Would you prefer the current proposal of enlargement of LCA Mk2 with GE FG414IN, or would it make sense to adopt the M88 Snecma-Kaveri variant and general redesign of the LCA mk2 to a Mini Rafale to supplement the 10 squadrons of MMRCA.


Case IV> This is a follow up to Case I, F161N comes with the option of signing up for the f35 program, would there be a case to curtail the local production of Rafale, to substitute it with F35's?


@PARIKRAMA @anant_s @Abingdonboy @Oscar @Taygibay please tag others

 

[PARIKRAMA]

A good topic. A long post. So please bear with me.

First my opening remark

Present IAF fleet planning is very simple. Divide the total number of aircraft as 20% light category 40% medium and 40% heavy far from ideally 40% light and 30% medium and 30% heavy.

This actually puts us to basic understanding of few number sets

​

The first target is to reach the basic squadron strength thats bare minimum needed and the second one (tgt 60) is the one level at bare minimum that IAF desires to feel comfortable for a 2 front war scenario.

This basically opens up the possible avenues to understand potential how much scope is available for the contenders here in LWF program.
Whichever is the final selected one among the alls or two in another possible scenario, the financial feasibility of such a project would need a 10 year period with first 3 years of setting up and 7 years of production. Even if its conservative at 16 jets a year the numbers have to be minimum 112 and above or say 7 squadrons and above. Add to it is the availability factor, downtime in upgrades, repairs, and attrition over time and you might end up with closer to 10 squads for a safety.

Case I> Assume that India does sign up for the F16IN -Super Viper in it's LWF program. Would it still make sense to select Rafale local production of 8 squadrons, or would you prefer a different Fighter to compliment the f16 IN?

• Assuming its F16IN, the proper designation of F16IN within the categories above is in between light and medium categories..
• In a hindsight, the planners may feel it can serve the need of numbers desired as well operational roles which are atm restricted based on category and type of fighters.
• The LM team will greatly impress that the strike package of F16IN with CFT can undertake the roles designed for the medium category with ease.
• On top the feasibility number as i stated above means it undercuts both categories. If light fighter desired level is 9 squads so then only 3 sqds are available (4 Mk1A, 1 IOC, 1 FOC both IOC,FOC upgraded to Mk1A later) and will also eat up Rafale bare minimum works (2 squads ordered and 6 sqds bare minimum planned under tranche 1)
• This means F16IN will easily become 9 squadron strength due to undercutting and brilliant positioning in between the two categories.
• But doctrine wise and ability wise, we will face some challenges as applicability of a single engined fighter in a combat radii of 1000-1500km zone (to be agreed and proved by IAF team with the CFT aspect) will need a massive change in terms of tactics, strategies and perhaps requisite training in order to have enough confidence to implement this plan.
• In short ideally if F16IN comes in LWF program, there wont be any substantial need in numbers of Rafale and LCA MK2 and future AMCA program can also be postponed as well.
• Unfortunately a major disadvantage will come when we talk about replacing the F16IN over time as
  • LWF- LCA
  • MWF- AMCA planned
• Since F16IN is in between category the replacement program in works AMCA will be desired to help and meet both categories demand and Light category beyond MK1 is no further refined or evolved
• This will put us in a undesirable position unless a new domestic LWF program is started to go back to the original plan of having categories and meeting the needs domestically.
• Another angle is the missile/weapon package it will come with. The all aspects of this fleet will be predominantly US MIC weapons. The integration of home grown and no presence of major WVR/BVR missiles of US origin will imply a lot more training and re-orientation for this fleet.
• Thus F16IN will take a lot longer time before it can reach a level where IAF can feel really comfortable of protecting our skies.
• An important point is F16IN virtually kills the IAF IN commonality aspect as IN will have to desire a fresh medium category jet for its future ACC ops (CATOBAR ones or hybrid carrier ones - Shtrom Class)
• No chance of usage of any strategic payloads is a big downside which is desired from medium category

Case II> What if Gripen NG is selected as a Second Parallel Platform to LCA Mk2, would that effect the MMRCA numbers if given a choice.

• The Gripen E/F case is similar to F16IN in terms of financial feasibility of the project angle.
• There is a strong possibility that Gripen E/F wont be second parallel platform but rather it will be the second platform as LCA MK2 as per what Saab is positioning the aircraft in IAF inventory.
• Gripen E/F will have many new frontier technologies and will be comparable to the most modern fighters like rafale and EF and in some aspects even better them untill their MLU programs again provide them vis a vis some capability leap.
• But Gripen E/F will attain FOC surely after 2021 and mostly closer to 2023. So our actual numbers wont come immediate and will take at least 5-7 years from decision making say from March 2017 onwards.
• The numbers due to second production line will quickly increase and the new frontier technologies like GaN and other upgraded avionics , low RCS and sensor fusion tech will help a lot.
• In case Gripen E/F becomes LCA Mk2, it will complement Rafale in medium category handsomely.
• Some of the weapons being common - Meteor and Derby/Python combo going into LCA Mk1A (http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/gripen-e-multirole-fighter-aircraft/) as well as A2G munitions like Brimstone
• This aspect helps in maintaining the commonality of the fleet support and weapons.
• What is a downside is Gripen E power plant is Ge 414 so there could be some restriction in terms of access and we cant desire TOT angle or aspect. Gripen E/F with a new home engine will require complete re evaluation , testing and certification as well.
• In terms of future evolution, Gripen has split avionics architecture that separates flight control system and tactical systems. This implies improvements can be undertaken in tactical avionics without interfering with flight characteristics
• The major gain can be implementing a highly robust customization based approach for Gripen E LCA Mk2 with certain tech going from Rafale and FGFA program as well as incorporating French and Israeli avionics into the tactical systems. Again this increases the commonality aspect as well as this edition IPR will be mostly with us.
• Downside will be end of LCA indigenous program but upside will be after 30 years plus when next replacement program comes out , it will have the better capability and technology available
• Saab also have clearly taken the Su30 MKI route in production and so far on paper their proposal is much clearer even though technical aspects of so called TOT is still an unsolved riddle.
• More infor here on the plan of Gripen https://defence.pk/threads/dassault...ussions-thread-2.351407/page-270#post-8447719 . Kept as link as its outside the scope of this thread.
• One very big advantage can be that Saab can use HAL as a JV partner for Gripen E thereby using its expertise to first guide LCA Mk1A present production and also use HAL for Gripen E/F LCA MK2 production as well. This will ease some of the worries of HAL surely.

Case III> F16in and Gripen both are rejected, and LCA Mk2 is the only platform for LWF. Would you prefer the current proposal of enlargement of LCA Mk2 with GE FG414IN, or would it make sense to adopt the M88 Snecma-Kaveri variant and general redesign of the LCA mk2 to a Mini Rafale to supplement the 10 squadrons of MMRCA.

• The rejection of both F16In and Gripen E/F is an ideal aspect IMHO.
• In such a case how soon present kaveri with Safran money infusion can be available as per desired numbers? 2020 as per reports. If timeline is adhered even with a slack of 1 more year its a wonderful addition
• I would always support this engine variant to power ouur LCA MK2 fleet and utilise the expertise of Dassault to help us redesign and downstream lot of Rafale tech into LCA MK2 and make it a mini rafale.
• The first biggest help will be the experience of Dassault in designing jets for a long time and now with no Mirage LCA Mk2 is not their competitor.
• Secondly sharing technological aspects common makes the LCA Mk2 have a similar sensor fusion, a potent EW attacking ad defensive suite like Spectra, Active cancellation tech, the further stealth aspect being increased, the RAM coatings etc. Along with this complementary sub systems will flow from Israel and FGFA program.
• Biggest benefit -
  • common weapons
  • common engine tech - service, spares, training
  • commonality of supply chain based out of MIC
  • Export orders can be jointly marketed by France and India government
  • MLU and upgrade package again gets jointly funded in common Rafale and LCA Mk2 program
• The advantages are way too many for such a magnificent, practical and IMHO the very best option which India can smartly use.
• If indian planners dont goof up this is the best solution as then AMCA can also become a joint project and can become Rafale NG program easily or borrow from the same.
• In practical situation this is the best option under the grandfathering or the "wizard" (in the words of @Picdelamirand-oil ) who can help our entire aerospace industry and MIC.

Case IV> This is a follow up to Case I, F161N comes with the option of signing up for the f35 program, would there be a case to curtail the local production of Rafale, to substitute it with F35's?

• This aspect is already there as discussed in Rafale Sticky.
• Going back to point 1, its clear that the F16In will undercut both Rafales as well as LCA programs
• But F16IN will never be able to meet IN requirement.
• This will prompt IN to procure F35s and to maintain a common supply chain it will be from same LM plant in India.
• Owing to no 5th gen Fighters in medium category in IAF stable, IAF will end up ordering a limited 2-3 squadron as well as you will see AMCA project being delayed (of course you will understand the reason - vested interests) and a combined 100+ F35s will be easily sold to India.
• LM will showcase the fact that since LM Indian line is there, India will not need Rafale MII and hence will be very comfortable with F35 program which will meet both IAF and IN needs from the very same infrastructure and with no extra investments.
• They may even forecast and prove that with limited FGFA fleet well complemented by F35s and F16s can actually take care of the whole IAF doctrine thereby using more USA assets.
• Thrown in together will be capability multipliers like AARs, AWACS, Surveillance Radars, etc etc as support package to aid and increase teh capability of this option.
• So in short no Rafale, no LCA Mk2 and No AMCA under this option
• But we will not have strategic packages usage in USA jets and this will cripple our one part of our triad deterrence as we will depend only on Russian jets only, completely

+++
In my honest assessment and what i have learned from my own sources whom i had discussed and deeply provided my own opinion , Option 3 - LCA Mk2 based on Mini Rafale program is the best bet. I have given this opinion in the last year end just before the finalization of Prez Hollande visit in Jan and again during March this year when i was talking with people who can convey what i was trying to convey to DM MP and MOD. By March Option 2 was on table itself with Gripen E/F as LCA Mk2. This is inspite of Option 3, which gives benefit of using Kaveri-Snecma variant and much more commonality aspects benefits. For me, the industrial side is immense under Option 3 and will leapfrog the India France relationship as we share a common vision, desire and term each other as strategic partners.


+++

tagging the cavalry

Pls note: incase you are not Senior members and still desire to contribute, pls post your reply in Whatever thread and tag me there, i will copy paste it here or will check with mods if they can shift the post here. Will try my level best to convey your opinions here for a rational discourse

@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec @Koovie @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito @SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer @Tshering22 @Dandpatta @danger007 @Didact @Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222 @Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular @Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki @CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug @Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx- @Perpendicular @scorpionx @proud_indian @Mustang06 @Param @Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs] @Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss @jbgt90 @Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp @Crixus @waz @WAJsal @Oscar @AugenBlick @Star Wars @GuardianRED @arp2041 @Aero @Armani @Arsalan @Skull and Bones @salarsikander @Kinetic @kaykay https://defence.pk/members/bregs.148509/ @RPK @others

 

[anant_s]

First of all Thanks to @MilSpec for providing this rather refreshing angle to the debate on India's fighter procurement. I hope we discuss and get insight into what is going to be watershed years for Indian Air Force in terms of acquiring new technology and answering questions to new threats that would develop in region.
Indian Aerospace industry too will undergo a significant change as it gets hands on assembling, manufacturing and servicing some of the most cutting edge defence products. Entry of private capital and participation in government programs will hopefully allow Air Force and government, a unique flexibility to run concurrent programs of introducing 2 or 3 platforms.
Political will and budgetary constraint notwithstanding, i think we are looking at exciting times ahead.

LCA (Mark 1, Mark 1A and Mark 2)

LCA development program ran for a long time (for reasons under and beyond control) but now the program has started to borne fruit and introduction of series production machines has already begun. A definitive roadmap for next variants (1A and 2) is already in place and with Navy in fray, technically the program looks promising.
So, first thing, irrespective of whatever platform or technology we procure as import, LCA program should not be abandoned. Rather any new decision should be with an angle on how to support this program, strengthen it, nurture it.

 

[Taygibay]

Knowing that direct procurement of Rafales is now about 2 squadrons and local MFG in the works

Case I> Assume that India does sign up for the F16IN -Super Viper in it's LWF program. Would it still make sense to select Rafale local production of 8 squadrons, or would you prefer a different Fighter to compliment the f16 IN?

Case II> What if Gripen NG is selected as a Second Parallel Platform to LCA Mk2, would that effect the MMRCA numbers if given a choice.

Case III> F16in and Gripen both are rejected, and LCA Mk2 is the only platform for LWF. Would you prefer the current proposal of enlargement of LCA Mk2 with GE FG414IN, or would it make sense to adopt the M88 Snecma-Kaveri variant and general redesign of the LCA mk2 to a Mini Rafale to supplement the 10 squadrons of MMRCA.


Case IV> This is a follow up to Case I, F161N comes with the option of signing up for the f35 program, would there be a case to curtail the local production of Rafale, to substitute it with F35's?

Case I »​

Rafale does much more than F-16 so the two are not mutually exclusive.
It does bring to light that an F-16 would take on both Rafale and Tejas from
bottom and top respectively edging against the production numbers of both.

That's reason one why I don't believe in an F-16 line. India would essentially
be creating competition within the fast jets part of its MIC before it even exists.​

Case II »»

You must have meant :
"What if Gripen NG is selected as the Primary Parallel Platform to LCA Mk2..."
Oh! Look, it spells PPP ^
​

Case III »»»

Adding an M-88 9T would surely helps the Tejas but it wouldn't make it a mini_Rafale.
The engine selected should be the proper fit for the LCA Mk2, period.

I would strongly advise not to re-design the LCA past correctives so the proper one here
means whichever of the two is already closest in metrics to sustain the type's career.
Forget politics for once and do it the IAF way - pick the best.
​

Case IV »»»»

OK so a spin on a spin it is. This is a chess move computation.
How very Indian of you! And part of the procurement problem
that plagues you guys! You can't plan for everything and each
new level of supposition draws you further away from reality.
Except that the opponent plays hockey not chess and that you
find yourself slammed in the boards face first while you think it
out, with a broken wrist, cheek bone and a severe concussion.

Let's ask the question correctly :
Does India want in on the F-35?

Won't it conflict with AMCA?
Won't it come at a cost ( or 2 )?
Won't it mean infeudation to US?

If yes, welcome F-16 and if not bye bye!
It's really that simple.
​

Thanks for the prompts MilSpec mate but I'll stick to simple plans,
a 3 tiered IAF MKI_Raffy_LCA Mk1-2 with commonalities with the IN
and FGFA & AMCA as future programs.
I know its not a common Indian spice but I like clarity myself and tend
to dash & sprinkle it very liberally on food for thoughts!

Stay safe and happy, Tay.

 

[Spectre]

Case I »​

Rafale does much more than F-16 so the two are not mutually exclusive.
It does bring to light that an F-16 would take on both Rafale and Tejas from
bottom and top respectively edging against the production numbers of both.

That's reason one why I don't believe in an F-16 line. India would essentially
be creating competition within the fast jets part of its MIC before it even exists.​

Case II »»

You must have meant :
"What if Gripen NG is selected as the Primary Parallel Platform to LCA Mk2..."
Oh! Look, it spells PPP ^
​

Case III »»»

Adding an M-88 9T would surely helps the Tejas but it wouldn't make it a mini_Rafale.
The engine selected should be the proper fit for the LCA Mk@, period.

I would strongly advise not to re-design the LCA past correctives so the proper one here
means whichever of the two is already closest in metrics to sustain the type's career.
Forget politics for once and do it the IAF way - pick the best.
​

Case IV »»»»

OK so a spin on a spin it is. This is a chess move computation.
How very Indian of you! And part of the procurement problem
that plagues you guys! You can't plan for everything and each
new level of supposition draws you further away from reality.
Except that the opponent plays hockey not chess and that you
find yourself slammed in the boards face first while you think it
out, with a broken wrist, cheek bone and a severe concussion.

Let's ask the question correctly :
Does India want in on the F-35?

Won't it conflict with AMCA?
Won't it come at a cost ( or 2 )?
Won't it mean infeudation to US?

If yes, welcome F-16 and if not bye bye!
It's really that simple.
​

Thanks for the prompts MilSpec mate but I'll stick to simple plans,
a 3 tiered IAF MKI_Raffy_LCA Mk1-2 with commonalities with the IN
and FGFA & AMCA as future programs.
I know its not a common Indian spice but I like clarity myself and tend
to dash & sprinkle it very liberally on food for thoughts!

Stay safe and happy, Tay.

BUT

Everything depends on the timeline doesn't it even if it is the Indian Standard Time.

The funny thing about time is it hits everything and everyone equally be it Indian or American or French Time.

Now F-35 will conflict with FGFA and AMCA - Check

BUT

Even Rafales in their MII avatar will conflict with AMCA and FGFA there being a slight lag b/w induction of Rafales and F-35 but then what are 5-6 years when you are talking in Indian time.

I raised the same point about conflicts presented by Rafales to AMCA project other day.

Consider First Rafales under MII turns out in 2022 (optimistically) First FGFA (2025) First First AMCA (2027) Each of these planes have service life of 30+ years threby making it clear one of them has to go. Wonder who will it be - Rafales, AMCA or FGFA

@MilSpec

 

[Taygibay]

Consider First Rafales under MII turns out in 2022 (optimistically) First FGFA (2025) First First AMCA (2027) Each of these planes have service life of 30+ years threby making it clear one of them has to go. Wonder who will it be - Rafales, AMCA or FGFA

Two things about that :
Primo : I don't accept 2027 for AMCA in the present context and doubt 2025 too.
Secundo : Adjust your numbers to correct for time.

So if Rafale is seen as impinging on AMCA, just buy 90 total instead of 126 total.
And if AMCA is late, keep the line open 2 to 4 more years and voilà!

But if one is worried about the MMRCA winner overshadowing AMCA, they should
also worry about MMRCA losers overshadowing TEJAS : F-16, Gripen, SH ...

Tay.

 

[Spectre]

Two things about that :
Primo : I don't accept 2027 for AMCA in the present context and doubt 2025 too.
Secundo : Adjust your numbers to correct for time.

So if Rafale is seen as impinging on AMCA, just buy 90 total instead of 126 total.
And if AMCA is late, keep the line open 2 to 4 more years and voilà!

But if one is worried about the MMRCA winner overshadowing AMCA, they should
also worry about MMRCA losers overshadowing TEJAS, F-16, Gripen, SH ...

Tay.

Fair point. This is a mess admittedly and fondly our mess.

The overlap is not in induction b/w AMCA and Rafale but service life. There will be an overlap b/w 90/126 Rafales and squadrons of AMCA. No so much space and budget.

.

 

[Taygibay]

Don't stress unduly, development mishaps eat overlaps for breakfast

... and crore lakh for lunch!

​

 

[Abingdonboy]

BUT

Everything depends on the timeline doesn't it even if it is the Indian Standard Time.

The funny thing about time is it hits everything and everyone equally be it Indian or American or French Time.

Now F-35 will conflict with FGFA and AMCA - Check

BUT

Even Rafales in their MII avatar will conflict with AMCA and FGFA there being a slight lag b/w induction of Rafales and F-35 but then what are 5-6 years when you are talking in Indian time.

I raised the same point about conflicts presented by Rafales to AMCA project other day.

Consider First Rafales under MII turns out in 2022 (optimistically) First FGFA (2025) First First AMCA (2027) Each of these planes have service life of 30+ years threby making it clear one of them has to go. Wonder who will it be - Rafales, AMCA or FGFA

@MilSpec

The FGFA is the successor to the MKI and will be built from 2025.

The Rafale is the successor to the Mig-21, Jaguar (all but DARIN III) and Mig-27 that will be in service from 2018/19 (off the shelf and from 2021 MII)

The AMCA is the successor to the DARIN III Jaguars, MiG-29UPG and Mirage 2000 and will be in service in 2030-2.

There really is very little overlap and there is ample room for all three types.

 

[salarsikander]

The Rafale is the successor to the Mig-21

I strongly believe its is LCA. You cannot replace hundreds of '21s with Rafael

 

[Spectre]

The FGFA is the successor to the MKI and will be built from 2025.

The Rafale is the successor to the Mig-21, Jaguar (all but DARIN III) and Mig-27 that will be in service from 2018/19 (off the shelf and from 2021 MII)

The AMCA is the successor to the DARIN III Jaguars, MiG-29UPG and Mirage 2000 and will be in service in 2030-2.

There really is very little overlap and there is ample room for all three types.

You are thinking from the old paradigm. Current Gen jets are all muti role and can swap mission profiles easily as opposed to earlier gen ones requiring multiple platforms.

Rafales, AMCA, FGFA all will be serving together thus creating an overlap @PARIKRAMA would you like to comment on the distinct roles performed by all three. Rafale is the sole jet of French - does that mean french airforce are lacking or unable to take on certain roles?

 

[Hellfire]

@MilSpec @PARIKRAMA

Case V: NDA plans to make a decision just before elections, looses them and gets voted out of power (remember Vajpayee was not expected to loose, even as per CIA assessment? We just need the middle class to sleep and we have the present government going out next time!). Congress comes, scraps all deals. IAF down to 15 squadron at the least.

Case V, in my opinion, seriously needs to be projected also, as more likely and pertinent in Indian political and MIC setup (OFB & other Defence PSU's QA is proven suspect).

Let us be intellectually honest. 2 threads on MMRCA with 300+ pages. And we have a new thread related!

We have Artillery modernisation program to refer as a text book case

I strongly believe its is LCA. You cannot replace hundreds of '21s with Rafael

.... meanwhile I am preparing a squadron to paper aircrafts for our air force!!

 

[salarsikander]

. meanwhile I am preparing a squadron to paper aircrafts for our air force!!

development such as this one at colossal scale takes time. Indian establishment is not just looking to tighten the nut bolt of Rafael like they did with mig 21's

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Rafales, AMCA, FGFA all will be serving together thus creating an overlap @PARIKRAMA would you like to comment on the distinct roles performed by all three. Rafale is the sole jet of French - does that mean french airforce are lacking or unable to take on certain roles?

I will divide my post in two halves.

First half will be a bit about the roles and second half will be about timelines.

About the Roles

• What i understand is inspite of modern fighter jets having multirole capabilities, the doctrine of IAF still follows the path of assigning roles based on classification between light, medium and heavy and utilises the aircrafts best performance in that particular domain.
• In terms of aircrafts forming the categories, the below figure is the most authentic realisation as well as pin pointing to what IAF is planning

​

• Without a doubt the Medium Weight replacement envisioned for a 4.75 Gen Rafale is a 5th gen AMCA and 4.5 Gen MKI (super upgrade) is expected to be 5th gen FGFA
• The basic differential roles can be defined for the sake of understanding is
• 
  
  
• This basically defines what is expected in very brief
• French side does not differentiate so heavily like us and are happy taking on all the roles , same like Russia using Flankers for everything

About the timelines

• FGFA - The stage 2 PAKFA should be available with 3 prototypes by 2023 with HAL. This with changes and with re-certification should make FGFA available for production by 2025-26 timeline.
• Now 5th Gen jets production wont be too high due to complexity involved in operations, maintenance and most importantly production angle as MIC has to reach a maturity level for that kind of work.
• AMCA basically is a further step ahead. The following pic is a very good illustration of what project AMCA is really
• 
  
  
• Thus here the word is matured LCA technologies (read 4/4.5th Gen)+ Insert the tech advantage from Make In India Medium category fighter + 5th gen tech flowing from FGFA.
• This practically will push AMCA beyond 2030 if we want a proper plane for Induction.
• IF you have a look at ADA paper on AMCA, the choice of technologies in the AMCA atm is unavailable for us and we are in process of developing some of it.
• But most of the technology which ADA matches with F35 and F22 cannot overnight be developed due to limited budget and resource allocation.
• On top, AMCA technology wont be available off the shelf unless the country is given a fighter jet program in India to enable some technology being localised and transferred.-

I wrote about this in a separate thread. Let me paste it here for a quick point some quotes form the same

and

This is the link for the full post
https://defence.pk/threads/using-te...d-to-make-it-happe.421961/page-2#post-8155216

So i dont see an overlapping case scenario for Rafales and AMCA as both will be spaced at least 15-20 years apart and will be basically AMCA replacing Rafales.


++++
@Abingdonboy - I would request you to reply to opening post by MilSpec.

 

[Hellfire]

development such as this one at colossal scale takes time. Indian establishment is not just looking to tighten the nut bolt of Rafael like they did with mig 21's

It is purely thanks to your country having relatively greater stupidity that we maintain an 'edge'. Had it been some other nation, we would be whipped again and again, 1962 being a case in example (India could actually have undertaken a military operation against China in 1950s!)