SOURCE: AFI
India’s longstanding reliance on Russian-made MiG fighters such as the MiG-21, MiG-23, and MiG-27 played a pivotal role in shaping the Indian Air Force (IAF) through the late 20th century. These jets, initially seen as capable and affordable solutions to bolster India’s air power, ended up affecting the IAF’s squadron strength as they aged faster than anticipated. While the MiG-21 was expected to serve for half a century and remain a backbone of the IAF, the MiG-23 and MiG-27 had to be prematurely retired due to critical design flaws and operational limitations, significantly affecting the IAF’s operational readiness.
The MiG-21 was inducted into the IAF in the 1960s and became a mainstay due to its agility, ease of maintenance, and relatively low operating costs. The IAF gradually expanded its MiG-21 fleet, and the aircraft saw considerable combat action over the years. Initially, the MiG-21 met the IAF’s expectations, performing admirably in close-range dogfights and holding its ground in regional conflicts. India hoped to sustain this platform through periodic upgrades, including the MiG-21 Bison variant, which incorporated modern avionics and weapon systems.
However, even with these enhancements, the MiG-21 started showing limitations in the 1990s as air combat evolved to emphasize beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagements, advanced radars, and enhanced electronic warfare capabilities. The airframe was increasingly unable to adapt to these changes, and operational mishaps due to aging systems began to rise. Despite these challenges, the IAF continued to rely on the MiG-21, intending to keep it operational for 50 years—a goal that stretched the platform beyond safe operational limits.
While the MiG-21 managed to persist despite its age, the MiG-23 and MiG-27 did not fare as well. Both fighters featured a variable-sweep wing design, intended to improve performance by allowing the wings to be adjusted for high-speed flight and low-speed maneuvering. However, this complex configuration introduced structural vulnerabilities, leading to issues in performance and durability. The IAF found that these jets required frequent and costly maintenance to address structural fatigue and wing-related malfunctions.
The MiG-23, introduced in the 1980s, was primarily used in interceptor and strike roles. Despite its high speed, the aircraft had limited agility and suffered from maintenance issues, largely due to its complex wing design and underperforming engine. The MiG-23’s operational lifespan was notably shorter than expected, and by the early 2000s, the IAF decided to retire the jet as its performance lagged behind more advanced fighters.
The MiG-27, an attack variant derived from the MiG-23, also fell short of expectations. Although it was designed as a close air support aircraft with a powerful cannon and the ability to carry heavy bombs, the jet was plagued by engine reliability issues. Its Tumansky R-29 engine faced persistent problems that severely affected its operational readiness. Additionally, the MiG-27’s variable-sweep wing design suffered from similar drawbacks, with frequent breakdowns impacting mission availability. Ultimately, the IAF was forced to retire the MiG-27 by 2019, several years earlier than anticipated.
The premature retirement of the MiG-23 and MiG-27, coupled with the aging MiG-21 fleet, created a significant shortfall in the IAF’s squadron strength. The IAF has historically aimed for a minimum of 42 combat squadrons to ensure adequate force projection and readiness across various conflict scenarios. However, with the phasing out of these older jets, the IAF’s squadron strength dropped to around 30 squadrons—a shortfall that has strategic implications for India’s air defense and offensive capabilities.
The IAF’s reliance on Russian fighters, which were cheaper and more readily available than Western counterparts, was initially a sound strategy to expand force numbers. But as these aircraft aged, the IAF found itself faced with the costly task of trying to keep them in service or prematurely retiring them, leading to an unsustainable cycle of declining squadron numbers. The inability to replace these jets quickly with modern alternatives has resulted in a capability gap that is only partially mitigated by the induction of advanced platforms like the Rafale, Tejas, and Su-30MKI.
The experience with the MiG series highlights the risks of overreliance on a single source of military technology, especially when that technology does not adapt well over time. The IAF’s fleet planning has shifted towards a more balanced approach, integrating aircraft from diverse sources and pursuing indigenous solutions like the HAL Tejas, which promises greater control over technology and supply chains.
To regain lost squadron strength, the IAF has accelerated the procurement of the Tejas Mk1A, is pushing for the rapid development of the Tejas MkII, and has entered into agreements to acquire more Rafales and potentially other multi-role fighter jets under the MRFA (Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft) program. These measures are essential to bridge the gap caused by the gradual phase-out of the remaining MiG-21 units and to ensure India’s aerial defense capabilities remain robust.