SOURCE: AFI
The landscape of global military aviation is undergoing a seismic shift, particularly with China’s aggressive advancements in fighter jet technology. Following the mass production of its 5th generation J-20 fighter jets and the successful first flight of what is believed to be a 6th generation aircraft, there’s an urgent call to reassess India’s air force procurement strategy, particularly concerning the long-discussed Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) program aimed at acquiring 4.5 generation jets.
The Indian Air Force (IAF) has been in the process of modernizing its fleet through the MRFA program, which seeks to procure 114 advanced multi-role fighter jets. The contenders range from the Eurofighter Typhoon to the French Rafale and the American F/A-18 Super Hornet, all categorized under the 4.5 generation of fighter technology. However, this approach now appears somewhat outdated in light of recent Chinese developments.
China’s J-20, a stealth fighter, has not only entered serial production but is also being deployed in significant numbers, with plans to reach over 1000 units by 2035. More critically, the recent first flight of a 6th generation fighter jet from China underscores Beijing’s intent to leapfrog existing technologies, aiming for capabilities like unmanned teaming, enhanced stealth, and possibly hypersonic speed.
Given these developments, there’s a growing consensus among defense analysts that India’s focus on 4.5 generation fighters might not sufficiently address the strategic threats posed by China’s advancements. The argument is simple: by the time these new jets are integrated into the IAF, they might already be matched or surpassed by Chinese technology.
The immediate recommendation is for India to pivot towards acquiring or accelerating the development of 5th generation fighters. The indigenous AMCA project, although promising, faces delays, with production not expected until the mid-2030s. In the interim, India might need to explore over-the-counter purchases of 5th generation fighters from abroad or expedite the AMCA’s development.
Critics of continuing with the MRFA argue that investing in 4.5 generation technology at this juncture is akin to buying obsolescence. The cost, time, and effort to acquire these jets could be better directed towards securing or developing technology that matches or exceeds current adversaries’ capabilities.
There’s also a push for international collaboration, not just for procurement but for co-development of next-generation fighter technology. This could involve partnerships with countries like the US, France, or even joining projects like the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) with the UK, Italy, and Japan to share the burden and benefits of cutting-edge fighter development.
The consensus is clear: the MRFA, as it currently stands, might be a relic of a past strategy. India must look ahead, if the MRFA program continues, it should be reoriented to include or exclusively focus on 5th-generation capabilities, even if this means fewer aircraft due to higher costs. Another option could be to Consider interim purchases of existing 5th generation platforms to maintain a competitive edge while indigenous projects mature.