My Article published on the EurasianTimes Website on 19 Mar 25.
In an interesting development, Portugal, Canada, and Germany are hesitating over the F-35. These developments can be both a challenge and an opportunity for India, whether India should jump into the fray and take the risk or stay away.
Indian Worries. India’s worries include operational and maintenance challenges, US policy uncertainty and technology transfer issues. Countries reconsidering their F-35 purchases usually cite concerns about high operational costs, maintenance complexities, and reliability issues. If a country like Canada, with a strong NATO supply chain, has problems, India, without an established F-35 ecosystem, could face serious logistics nightmares. India has historically struggled with restrictive American defence deals (e.g., CAATSA concerns with Russia). If Canada and Portugal are reconsidering under U.S. influence, India’s potential F-35 deal might come with diplomatic strings attached. Moreover, the U.S. is unlikely to share deep tech integration rights.
Opportunity. On the bright side, the cancellations by these countries could open up production slots, potentially leading to expedited deliveries if India proceeds with an F-35 deal. Furthermore, under these circumstances, Lockheed Martin may be more accommodating in pricing or support agreements with India. A limited number of F-35s could act as a stepping stone to India’s indigenous AMCA program, providing valuable 5th-gen combat experience until India develops its own.
Balancing Affordability and Capability. Balancing affordability and capability in fighter acquisition programs is a complex and intellectually stimulating challenge in defence procurement. Modern fighter jets, with their advanced avionics, stealth technology, and weapons systems, are not just engineering marvels but also strategic assets that can dominate air, land, and sea. However, these capabilities come at a steep cost, and governments must grapple with budgetary constraints while ensuring their air forces remain capable of addressing current and future threats.
Trade-offs. Understanding and navigating the myriad trade-offs in fighter aircraft acquisition programs are a cornerstone of defence procurement. Balancing performance, cost, operational requirements, and strategic objectives is a complex task that governments and military planners must master to ensure optimal capability within the constraints of their resources. This knowledge empowers decision-makers and enhances the effectiveness of defence strategies.
Trade-Offs for Consideration in Fighter Acquisition Programs
Cost vs. Capability. A fundamental trade-off in fighter acquisition is between cost and capability. High-end fifth-generation fighters like the F-35 and the F-22 offer unparalleled performance but come at an exorbitant price. More cost-effective alternatives, such as the F-16 or the Gripen, may lack some advanced features but remain viable options for many air forces. Nations must decide whether to prioritise cutting-edge technology or opt for a more extensive fleet with slightly reduced capabilities.
Multirole Flexibility vs. Specialisation. Many modern fighters, such as the F-35 and Rafale, are designed as multirole platforms capable of performing air-to-air, air-to-ground, and electronic warfare missions. This flexibility reduces fleet diversity but may lead to compromises in specific roles. In contrast, specialised aircraft like the A-10 Thunderbolt II excel in close air support but lack air superiority capabilities. Decision-makers must weigh whether a single multirole platform meets their needs or if specialised aircraft are necessary.
Short-Term vs. Long-Term Investment. Some nations prioritise acquiring proven, off-the-shelf platforms that provide immediate operational capability, while others invest in the long-term development of next-generation aircraft. The former minimises short-term risks but may become outdated sooner. The latter approach, seen in programs like the Tempest and NGAD, is high-risk but ensures future technological superiority.
Fleet Size vs. High-End Technology. Budget constraints often force militaries to choose between a more extensive fleet of less advanced fighters or a smaller number of top-tier aircraft. A more comprehensive fleet provides more coverage and sortie rates, while a smaller fleet of high-end fighters offers superior combat capability. For instance, many nations supplement their fleets of expensive stealth aircraft with cheaper fourth-generation fighters to maintain numbers.
Capability vs. Quantity. Nations must decide between procuring fewer advanced jets or a more extensive fleet of less capable aircraft. For instance, the U.S. chose to supplement its high-end F-22 fleet with the more affordable F-35, while countries like China and Russia have emphasised quantity to ensure strategic depth.
Indigenous Development vs. Foreign Procurement. Countries face a strategic choice between developing domestic fighter programs and purchasing from foreign suppliers. Indigenous programs, such as India’s Tejas/AMCA or South Korea’s KF-21, promote self-sufficiency but require significant research and industrial infrastructure investment. Buying foreign jets ensures immediate capability but can lead to dependency on external suppliers.
Indigenous Fighter Development for Cost-Effectiveness. India’s HAL Tejas was developed to reduce reliance on foreign fighters while maintaining affordability. Designed with modular upgrades in mind, the Tejas has gradually improved with better radar, weapons integration, and avionics. Despite delays in development, its affordability compared to Western counterparts has made it an attractive option for India’s long-term air power strategy.
Balancing Affordability and Capability
Balancing affordability and capability in fighter acquisition programs is a complex but essential task for modern air forces. Governments must ensure that their aircraft provide operational effectiveness without exceeding budgetary constraints. The following best practices help achieve this balance.
Comprehensive Lifecycle Planning. A fighter jet’s cost extends far beyond its initial acquisition price. Governments must consider long-term expenses, including operation, maintenance, upgrades, and eventual disposal. Comprehensive lifecycle cost analysis, which involves estimating all costs associated with a system over its entire life, helps mitigate budgetary surprises and ensures financial sustainability over decades of service.
Incremental Upgrades. Modern fighter jets should have modular systems and open architectures to accommodate incremental upgrades. This approach extends an aircraft’s service life while spreading costs over time. The F-16 Fighting Falcon, introduced in the 1970s, remains operational due to continuous upgrades in avionics, radar, and weapons. This strategy prevents obsolescence while reducing the need for costly new aircraft acquisitions.
Focus on Multi-Role Capability. Multi-role fighters provide greater operational flexibility by performing various missions with a single platform. The Dassault Rafale exemplifies this concept, capable of air-to-air combat, ground attack, and reconnaissance missions. This versatility allows air forces to reduce the number of specialised aircraft types, simplifying logistics and maintenance while lowering overall costs.
Prioritising Export Potential. Designing fighter jets with exportability in mind helps amortise development costs and reduce per-unit expenses. Countries that successfully market their fighters to foreign buyers can reinvest revenues into further technological advancements.
Emerging Trends and Technologies. Technological advancements are reshaping how air forces balance affordability and capability. The following emerging trends offer cost-effective solutions while enhancing combat effectiveness.
Unmanned Systems. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and ‘loyal wingman’ drones, which are autonomous aircraft that operate alongside manned aircraft, complement traditional fighter jets by taking on high-risk missions at a lower cost. These platforms can conduct reconnaissance, electronic warfare, and combat operations without endangering pilots. Programs like the Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat highlight the growing role of UAVs and ‘loyal wingman’ drones in modern air combat.
Artificial Intelligence. AI-powered systems improve decision-making, enhance situational awareness, and reduce pilot workload. Advanced AI integration enables autonomous operations, making fighters more effective while potentially reducing crew training costs. AI-driven mission planning and adaptive combat algorithms are key to next-generation fighter capabilities.
Conclusion
Balancing affordability and capability in fighter acquisition programs is a complex but essential endeavour. As nations face evolving threats and fiscal constraints, the ability to make strategic trade-offs will determine their air power’s effectiveness. By embracing innovative technologies and fostering international collaboration, governments can achieve an optimal balance that ensures operational readiness and financial sustainability.
India traditionally prefers non-restrictive platforms like the Rafale and Su-30MKI that allow customisation. The F-35, despite its advanced stealth and networking, is deeply tied to U.S. control mechanisms. If Germany, Canada, and Portugal, NATO allies with solid U.S. interoperability, are hesitating, India must be doubly cautious before signing anything. The Big Question, however, remains whether India should even consider the F-35. After analysing the factors mentioned earlier, the current answer is negative (even with faster delivery schedules).
For considering the F-35 as a potential option for India, several critical concerns must be addressed to make it a viable choice. Foremost among these is the issue of technology transfer and support to Indigenous aircraft development.Operational sovereignty is essential, as any restrictions imposed by the U.S. could limit India’s ability to integrate indigenous systems and conduct independent upgrades. Cost considerations (including procurement, maintenance, and lifecycle expenses) must be carefully weighed against alternative platforms. Geopolitical reliability is another key factor, given past U.S. sanctions and export restrictions that could impact fleet sustainability. Finally, interoperability with India’s existing fleet and infrastructure must be thoroughly assessed to ensure seamless integration without excessive logistical burdens. Addressing these concerns through ironclad agreements and long-term strategic assurances would be essential for India even to consider the F-35 option (in limited numbers).
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
My Article was Published in the Chanakya Diaries, Issue 2, Spring 2025.
The world of military aviation has witnessed a significant leap in technological advancements, particularly in developing fifth-generation fighter aircraft (5GFA). These next-generation fighter jets are equipped with stealth technology, advanced avionics, and superior weaponry, allowing them to operate in highly contested airspaces. As global military technologies advance, so does the need for air forces to adopt cutting-edge systems capable of responding to emerging threats. Acquisition of such advanced technologies is crucial for maintaining air superiority and securing national interests. However, India’s path to acquiring fifth-generation fighters has been filled with challenges, forcing the country into a quandary about securing these crucial assets for its Air Force. This article delves into India’s dilemma regarding 5th-gen fighter jets, exploring the complexities of the decision-making process, the challenges posed by current defence procurements, and the country’s broader defence and geopolitical considerations.
Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft
Fifth-generation fighter aircraft represent the pinnacle of modern military aviation, incorporating cutting-edge stealth, advanced avionics, superior manoeuvrability, and network-centric warfare capabilities. These aircraft are designed to achieve air superiority while minimising detection through radar-evading features such as internal weapons bays, composite materials, and aerodynamic shaping. Notable examples include the U.S. F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II, China’s J-20, and Russia’s Su-57. Unlike previous generations, fifth-generation fighters rely on sensor fusion, artificial intelligence-assisted decision-making, and high-capacity data links to dominate the battle-space. Their integrated avionics provide pilots with unparalleled situational awareness, allowing seamless coordination with other forces and unmanned systems. High-thrust engines with supercruise capability enable sustained supersonic speeds without afterburners, enhancing operational range and fuel efficiency. Furthermore, their electronic warfare and cyber capabilities allow them to disrupt enemy communications and radar systems. While these aircraft offer unmatched lethality and survivability, their complexity and cost present production, maintenance, and procurement challenges. Nations investing in fifth-generation fighters seek battlefield dominance and strategic deterrence, as control of the skies remains a decisive factor in modern warfare. As military technology advances, these fighters continue to evolve, shaping the future of aerial combat.
IAF Challenges and Necessities
Prevailing Challenges. India is a major regional player, and due to its unique geographical location and geo-political environment, it faces a collusive threat (from its two nuclear-powered unfriendly neighbours) with significant chances of military conflict. This unique position dictates that the country be able to deter her hostile neighbours from any military misadventure singly or collusively. Besides land borders being the main reason for the dispute, the security of the IOR region would also be a major security necessity. IAF would be required to offer options to meet India’s domestic and regional security requirements.
Air Threat. For a considerable time, the IAF enjoyed an edge in modern combat aircraft over its rivals – the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) and the Pakistan Air Force (PAF). This situation is changing with the PLAAF transformation, China’s investment in aerospace research and development, and aircraft manufacturing. China has inducted its two home-grown stealth fighters (J-20 and J-31) in large numbers and has already flown sixth-generation prototypes. Pakistan continues to be in collusion with China. PAF has inducted Chinese J-10 and JF-17 aircraft and has desired to induct Chinese fifth-generation aircraft.
Urgent Necessity. The Indian Air Force’s current strength is significantly below its sanctioned level. Its indigenous development of fourth—and fifth-generation aircraft faces technological hurdles and time delays. In the face of prevailing challenges, India cannot afford to lag in its military capability. The impending air threat from China and Pakistan has made the acquisition of fifth-generation fighters an urgent and necessary priority to enhance the IAF’s deterrence value.
Acquisition Efforts
Collaborative Effort. India’s journey toward acquiring fifth-generation fighter aircraft began with an ambitious collaboration with Russia. In 2007, India partnered with Russia to co-develop the Su-57, also known as the T-50 or PAK-FA. This project was expected to yield a fifth-generation fighter with advanced stealth capabilities and cutting-edge avionics, making it a crucial addition to India’s fleet. While India’s collaboration with Russia began with great optimism, several issues soon emerged related to cost overruns, development delays, and technological shortcomings, leading to re-evaluating the program. 2018, after years of joint research and development, India decided to pull out of the Su-57 program, marking a pivotal moment in its fifth-generation fighter aspirations. The decision left India searching for alternative solutions.
MRFA Acquisition. The history of India’s Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) acquisition effort is marked by ambitious plans and evolving defence strategies to modernise the IAF’s fighter fleet. The origins of the MRFA initiative can be traced back to the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) tender issued in 2007, which sought to acquire 126 fighter jets to replace the ageing MiG-21 fleet. After extensive evaluations and trials, the Dassault Rafale emerged as the preferred choice in 2012; however, contractual disagreements and cost escalations led to the eventual scrapping of the deal in 2015. In its place, the Indian government opted for a government-to-government deal to procure 36 Rafale jets in 2016 to meet urgent operational needs. The failure of the MMRCA tender to materialise in its original form highlighted the complexities involved in large-scale defence procurements, including cost considerations, technology transfer requirements, and offset agreements. In response to these challenges, the IAF redefined its requirements and reinitiated the procurement process under the MRFA program in 2019. The renewed effort sought to leverage lessons learned from the previous tender while emphasising indigenisation and the development of India’s defence manufacturing capabilities under the ‘Make in India’ initiative. Unlike its predecessor, the MRFA acquisition focuses more on domestic production, requiring foreign vendors to collaborate with Indian defence firms to establish local assembly lines and facilitate technology transfers.
Overview of the MRFA Acquisition Program. The MRFA acquisition program is a critical initiative by the Indian Air Force to acquire 114 advanced multi-role fighter jets to enhance its operational capabilities and replace its ageing fleet of legacy aircraft. Under MRFA, the IAF aims to procure state-of-the-art fighters that can undertake various combat roles, including air superiority, ground attack, reconnaissance, and electronic warfare, ensuring dominance in modern warfare scenarios. The MRFA acquisition process is structured under the ‘Make in India’ initiative, emphasising indigenous production and technology transfer to boost the domestic defence industry. The IAF issued a global Request for Information (RFI) in 2019, inviting proposals from major aircraft manufacturers worldwide. The procurement is expected under the Strategic Partnership (SP) model, which involves collaboration between foreign Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and Indian defence firms. This collaboration required establishing production lines within the country and transferring critical technologies, reducing import dependency and promoting self-reliance in the defence sector. One of the essential requirements outlined by the IAF in the MRFA tender is the transfer of technology (ToT), which will allow Indian defence companies to gain technical expertise in aircraft manufacturing, maintenance, and future upgrades. The current situation stresses the inclusion of fifth-generation aircraft in the acquisition plans.
Domestic Solution: AMCA. India has pursued an indigenous solution to its 5th-gen fighter needs through the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA). The AMCA is being developed by the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) under the Indian Ministry of Defence. It is intended to be a 5th-gen fighter with advanced stealth technology, super-cruise capabilities, and cutting-edge avionics. While the AMCA represents a step toward self-reliance and is seen as a critical component of India’s long-term military strategy, several challenges are associated with its development. The development of the AMCA has faced numerous delays. Initially slated for entry into service by the mid-2020s, it is now expected to enter service closer to the late 2030s. The project also faces significant technological challenges in developing a fighter of this sophistication. While progress is being made, achieving the same level of performance and stealth as the F-35 or Su-57 remains a formidable task.
Choices and Possibilities. Both the U.S. and Russia are aggressively pitching their fifth-generation aircraft. Besides outright purchase, India may explore collaboration and joint development programs or technology transfers (Stealth, Aero-engines and advanced avionics) that accelerate AMCA’s timeline. Limited acquisitions of F-35s or Su-57s focusing on training and operational familiarity while ensuring that AMCA remains the primary focus are also possible options.
The Foreign Procurement Dilemma
Given the delays and challenges of Indigenous development, India has to explore foreign procurement options for fifth-generation fighter jets. The United States, with its F-35 Lightning II and the Russian SU-57, has emerged as a potential source of these advanced aircraft. However, several geopolitical, diplomatic, and technical barriers complicate purchasing these aircraft.
U.S. Signals: F-35 Lightning II. The U.S. has been subtly signalling a potential offer of the F-35 to India. The aircraft first appeared in the Indian skies in the previous aero India 2023. Although Washington has not officially proposed a deal, diplomatic engagements and increasing defence cooperation between the two nations suggest that such a move could be on the horizon. Some analysts believe the U.S. could propose the F-35 as a deterrent against China, leveraging India’s growing security concerns to break its traditional reluctance toward American fighter jets. The F-35, developed by Lockheed Martin, represents the epitome of 5th-gen fighter capabilities. It is a highly advanced stealth fighter, but its suitability for the Indian Air Force (IAF) is debatable due to operational, geopolitical, and logistical factors. While the F-35 offers cutting-edge stealth, sensor fusion, and electronic warfare capabilities, making it a formidable asset against threats, its integration into India’s diverse fleet (Su-30MKI, Rafale, Tejas) would be complex and costly. The aircraft’s high maintenance burden, reliance on U.S. software and spare parts support, and logistical challenges in high-altitude operations raise concerns. Additionally, India’s deep defence ties with Russia and its commitment to strategic autonomy could complicate an F-35 deal. The U.S. has been selective about F-35 exports, prioritising NATO allies and key Pacific partners, making approval for India uncertain. With unit costs exceeding $80 million and long-term sustainment expenses, the F-35 may not be the most cost-effective option compared to expanding Rafale squadrons or accelerating the indigenous AMCA program.
Russia’s Pitch: The Su-57 Felon. Russia is presenting the Su-57 Felon as a possible solution for India’s air power needs. The offer is sugar quoted with an offer to reduce price, Integration of hypersonic weapons, ToT and easy payment options. The Su-57, initially designated the PAK FA (Prospective Airborne Complex of Frontline Aviation), began development in the early 2000s under the Russian Ministry of Defence. The aircraft was conceived as a multirole stealth fighter capable of air superiority and ground attack missions. Given India’s deep-rooted defence ties with Russia and its existing fleet of Su-30MKI fighters, Moscow sees this as a natural extension of its strategic partnership. However, India has been cautious about procuring the Su-57 due to previous setbacks in the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project. While the Su-57 has promising features, the program has faced several challenges that have slowed its development and deployment. The aircraft has faced delays related to engine development and avionics integration. Moreover, there have been questions about the production rate and the number of aircraft that will be built in the coming years. The Russian Air Force has been slow to field the aircraft, and it remains unclear how many Su-57s will ultimately be deployed, particularly as Russia faces significant budgetary constraints and competing priorities.
Comparative Analysis. The Su-57’s development and operational capabilities are often compared to the U.S. F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II, representing American stealth technology’s pinnacle. While the Su-57 has similar features, such as stealth and advanced avionics, it lags in some performance areas. For example, the F-22 is generally considered superior regarding stealth and overall aerodynamics, while the F-35 is unrivalled in sensor fusion and multirole capabilities. However, the Su-57 holds unique advantages that could make it a formidable platform in specific scenarios. Its super manoeuvrability and advanced sensor capabilities make it highly suited for air-to-air combat and could give it an edge over Western fighters in certain situations. Moreover, its weapons capacity and the potential future integration of hypersonic weapons give it a longer-range and more potent offensive capability than current Western fighters.
Indigenous Effort.
Push for Indigenous Development: The AMCA Program. India’s exit from the Su-57 program signalled a renewed focus on indigenous development. Under pressure to modernise and enhance its capabilities, India pushed to develop its fifth-generation fighter. The Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) program was born out of this necessity. The AMCA was conceived as India’s first fully indigenous fifth-generation fighter. The project envisions incorporating stealth, advanced avionics, supercruise and multi-role capabilities. While the AMCA represents a significant leap forward for India’s indigenous defence capabilities, its development has not been without challenges. The program has faced technological hurdles, financial constraints, and inordinate delays. The prototype of the AMCA is expected to take flight in the late 2020s, with full-scale production not anticipated until the early 2040s. The AMCA is crucial to India’s long-term defence strategy. Its delayed timeline and high costs mean the country must consider alternatives soon to fill the capability gap.
Effect on the AMCA Development. India’s procurement of foreign fifth-generation fighter aircraft could positively or negatively affect the development of its Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) program. On the one hand, it could gain valuable insights into the design and technology of a fifth-generation fighter aircraft, including stealth capabilities, advanced avionics, and engine performance. This could accelerate the learning curve for Indian engineers and help improve AMCA’s design. On the other hand, foreign procurement could divert attention and resources from the AMCA project, as both programs require significant investment and focus. This could delay AMCA’s development as funding and manpower may be reallocated. While foreign procurement might provide a short-term solution, procuring it would reinforce India’s dependency on foreign technology, which contradicts the AMCA’s goal of achieving greater self-reliance in defence technology. It might also delay the domestic innovation necessary to produce the AMCA independently.
Procurement Considerations: A Tight Rope Walk.
India’s pursuit of fifth-generation fighter aircraft (FGFA) is a complex balancing act, requiring careful evaluation of strategic, operational, and geopolitical factors. Despite the aggressive pitches from Russia and the U.S., India remains steadfast in its commitment to self-reliance. The country has several valid concerns about acquiring stealth fighters from external sources. The procurement decision must balance national security imperatives with long-term self-reliance goals.
Financial Constraints. While the need for advanced fighter aircraft is pressing, India’s defence budget remains constrained. The costs of acquiring 5th-gen fighters—whether through foreign procurement or domestic development—are substantial.
Strategic Autonomy. India has historically maintained strategic autonomy in defence procurement. Outright procurement of fifth-generation fighters would increase dependency on foreign suppliers for maintenance, spares, and software updates. However, developing an indigenous FGFA is time-intensive and costly, necessitating interim solutions such as collaborations or selective acquisitions. Balancing these factors ensures India can act independently in future conflicts without external constraints.
Operational Sovereignty. Fifth-generation fighters rely heavily on integrated software, sensor fusion, and artificial intelligence, requiring continuous updates and security oversight. Procuring an FGFA from the U.S. or Russia may come with software black boxes, limiting India’s ability to modify or customise the aircraft to suit its operational needs. In contrast, an indigenous program like the AMCA would ensure complete control over mission configurations, electronic warfare systems, and weapons integration. India risks operational constraints without complete control in scenarios where its strategic interests diverge from supplier nations.
Transfer of Technology (ToT). India has consistently demanded significant technology transfer as part of its defence procurements. One of the most crucial considerations in FGFA procurement is access to critical technologies such as stealth coatings, advanced radar systems, and aero engines. Nations that export fifth-generation fighters typically impose strict restrictions on technology transfers to protect proprietary designs and maintain their competitive edge. India must negotiate deals that ensure meaningful technology absorption, aiding AMCA’s long-term development.
Interoperability Issues. India operates a diverse fleet comprising Russian, French, Israeli, and indigenous aircraft, leading to interoperability challenges. Integrating an FGFA with existing platforms is critical, especially for network-centric warfare. American platforms, such as the F-35, rely on proprietary Link 16 data-sharing protocols, which may not be compatible with India’s indigenous combat management systems. On the other hand, Russian fighters align with existing IAF infrastructure but lack the networking capabilities of Western aircraft. Any FGFA procurement must ensure seamless integration with India’s Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS) while avoiding security vulnerabilities tied to foreign command structures.
Reliance and Reliability Concerns. Fifth-generation fighters require a robust supply chain for spare parts, software updates, and maintenance. India’s experience with Russian platforms, such as the Su-30MKI, has shown that supply bottlenecks can impact fleet availability. Similarly, reliance on the U.S. for F-35 components could expose India to geopolitical leverage, where supply disruptions may occur due to policy shifts. An indigenous FGFA would mitigate these risks. However, India must bridge the gap in manufacturing critical components, such as high-thrust jet engines and low-observable coatings, to ensure long-term sustainability.
Geopolitical Pressures. India’s FGFA decision is deeply entangled in global power dynamics. Acquiring an American fighter would enhance ties with QUAD allies (U.S., Japan, Australia) but could strain India’s strategic partnership with Russia. Conversely, a Russian FGFA might provoke U.S. sanctions under CAATSA (Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act), complicating India’s defence cooperation with Western nations. Thus, any procurement choice must navigate these external influences without compromising national security.
Way Ahead
India’s quest for fifth-generation fighter aircraft is emblematic of the broader challenges emerging powers face in the 21st century. While the country has made significant strides in developing Indigenous defence capabilities, the path to acquiring fifth-generation fighters remains fraught with challenges. The choices India makes in the coming years will shape its defence posture and air superiority in the decades ahead. While the AMCA holds promise for India’s long-term goals, the immediate need for advanced fighter aircraft means that foreign options, including the F-35 or SU-57, will likely remain in play despite the geopolitical and financial challenges they present.
India’s success in this endeavour will depend on its ability to integrate technology, manage its defence budget, and forge strategic partnerships that advance its security interests in a rapidly evolving global landscape. Given the complexity of fifth-generation fighter procurement, India must focus on accelerating the AMCA program while exploring selective technology partnerships. A dedicated task force with a top-down approach could ensure timely execution. Increased funding, private sector involvement, and strategic technology acquisitions could further bolster the program.
India must balance Indigenous development with the need for foreign procurement while navigating a complex geopolitical landscape. While India will likely continue seeking a combination of foreign procurements and domestic development, the path forward will require careful navigation of technological and strategic challenges. Ultimately, India’s ability to field a fleet of 5th-gen fighters will depend on its ability to balance these competing demands while securing the necessary resources and partnerships to maintain its regional and global standing.
Conclusion
The stealth fighter war is not just about aircraft but about India’s position in the global defence landscape. The choices made in the coming years will define India’s air power for decades. While Aero India 2025 will serve as a grand stage for the U.S. and Russia to showcase their best fighters, India must navigate this battle carefully. Whether it chooses a limited acquisition, a joint development initiative, or a complete rejection of external options, one thing is clear: India’s future in stealth aviation will be determined by its ability to balance strategic autonomy with practical air power needs.
Please Do Comment.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
References:-
Dyer, G. (2017). India’s Role in Global Security: An Assessment of Its Military and Strategic Options. Oxford University Press. Covers India’s military strategies and defence procurement policies, giving context to its fifth-generation fighter aircraft decisions.
Tiwari, R. (2020). India’s Aviation Power: The Development of India’s Military Aviation. Routledge. This book focuses on India’s aviation capabilities, history, and future trajectory, including the fifth-generation fighter aircraft.
Sarma, B. (2021). Fifth-Generation Aircraft and the Changing Nature of Air Combat: A Global Perspective. Springer. This book analyses the technologies and capabilities defining fifth-generation aircraft and how different countries adopt them.
Pant, H. V. (2018). India’s Strategic Culture and Military Modernisation: A Cross-Disciplinary Approach. Routledge. Offers insight into India’s military modernisation strategies and how they affect decisions about future aircraft acquisitions.
Bansal, S. (2022). “Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft: The India Dilemma”, Strategic Affairs Journal, 14(3), pp. 245-268. This article addresses India’s balancing act between domestic capabilities, foreign partnerships, and defence priorities regarding fifth-generation fighters.
Chaudhury, S. (2020). “India’s Ambitious Fighter Program and the Quest for the AMCA”, The Military Review, 102(4), pp. 60-75. A detailed analysis of India’s AMCA project and the prospects of its success in the context of competing international options.
Indian Ministry of Defence (2021). India’s Future Aircraft Procurement Strategy: A Vision for the Next Decade. Government of India. Government-published paper detailing India’s strategic requirements and procurement strategy, including pursuing fifth-generation fighters.
RAND Corporation (2021). “Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft: A Global Overview”. RAND Corporation. A comprehensive analysis of the global fifth-generation fighter market, including India’s potential partners and competitors.
IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly (2019). “The Future of Combat Aircraft: A Comparative Study”, 56(8), pp. 32-45. This report compares the capabilities of fifth-generation fighters, focusing on the Su-57, F-35, and AMCA, with a section on India’s defence procurement options.
Shukla, A. (2021). “India’s Fighter Jet Dilemma: Will AMCA Be the Answer?” Livefist Defence. https://www.livefistdefence.com. A detailed exploration of the AMCA program and India’s obstacles in developing its fifth-generation aircraft.
The rapid advancement of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), known as drones, has revolutionised modern warfare. Once primarily used for reconnaissance and surveillance, drones have evolved into sophisticated combat platforms capable of executing precision strikes, electronic warfare, and logistics support. The proliferation of combat drones challenges the dominance of traditional airpower by altering strategic doctrines, operational tactics, and force structures. This article explores the rise of combat drones and their profound implications for conventional airpower.
Armed variants of the Predator, such as the MQ-1 and MQ-9 Reaper, demonstrated the feasibility of unmanned precision strikes, ushering in a new era of aerial warfare. Since then, countries such as China, Russia, Turkey, and Iran have rapidly developed their combat drone capabilities. Technological advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), sensor miniaturisation, and autonomous navigation have expanded combat drones’ capabilities. Modern drones can operate autonomously, engage in complex swarm tactics (where multiple drones coordinate their actions in real-time), and integrate with network-centric warfare systems. A list of major combat drones is appended.
Key Advantages of Combat Drones
Combat drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), have rapidly transformed modern military operations. They offer a range of significant advantages that enhance strategic effectiveness and operational efficiency. These advantages are critical for established military powers and smaller nations looking to improve their defence capabilities.
Cost-Effectiveness. One of the most prominent advantages of combat drones is their cost-effectiveness. Traditional manned aircraft, such as fighter jets and bombers, involve substantial financial investments in production, maintenance, fuel, and the continuous training of pilots. These high operational and training costs make them financially burdensome, especially for nations with smaller defence budgets. Combat drones, in contrast, are much more affordable to produce, operate, and maintain. This makes drones an attractive option for military forces seeking advanced technology without the prohibitive expenses of traditional aviation.
Reduced Risk to Human Life. The ability to operate drones remotely means that military personnel are not physically present in the combat environment, which significantly reduces the risk to human life. Manned aircraft often place pilots in high-risk situations, such as hostile airspace, where the threat of anti-aircraft weapons, enemy fighters, or surface-to-air missiles is constant. This feature makes drones especially valuable for missions in high-risk zones, such as counterterrorism operations, surveillance of enemy positions, or strikes against heavily fortified targets. By minimising human casualties, drones ensure mission sustainability and allow forces to continue operations with fewer limitations.
Persistent Surveillance and Endurance. Unlike manned aircraft with limited flight durations due to fuel constraints, combat drones can remain airborne for extended periods, often hours or even days. This endurance allows drones to conduct continuous intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations over extended periods without returning to the base for fuel or rest. Drones can loiter over targets for extended periods, tracking enemy movements, gathering intelligence, and relaying data to commanders. This constant flow of information improves situational awareness and allows military forces to remain proactive rather than reactive in their operations.
Precision Strike Capabilities. Modern combat drones are equipped with advanced targeting systems, enabling them to conduct precise strikes with high accuracy. This precision is made possible through advanced sensors, cameras, and laser-guided munitions, which enable drones to accurately identify and engage enemy targets such as vehicles, facilities, or personnel, even in complex environments. Precision is critical in counterinsurgency operations, where avoiding collateral damage is crucial for maintaining local support and reducing the risk of civilian backlash.
Operational Flexibility. Another significant advantage of combat drones is their operational flexibility. Drones are highly versatile and can be deployed in various roles, from surveillance and reconnaissance to electronic warfare and decoy operations. They can serve as support platforms for ground troops, relaying intelligence, providing airstrikes, or conducting search and rescue missions. Drones can also be used in electronic warfare, disrupting enemy communication systems or jamming radar signals. Additionally, drones can serve as decoys, drawing enemy fire or confusing adversaries about the location of critical assets. This adaptability makes drones valuable assets in numerous military operations, enhancing their utility in diverse combat scenarios.
Drone Usage in Recent Conflicts
Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. This conflict saw extensive use of drones by Azerbaijan, which utilised both tactical drones for surveillance and loitering munitions for precision strikes. Azerbaijan’s use of Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones (a medium-altitude, long-endurance tactical unmanned aerial vehicle), alongside Israeli-made drones, played a crucial role in undermining Armenian defensive positions and disrupting supply lines. Drones provided real-time intelligence and executed targeted airstrikes, significantly impacting the battlefield dynamics. The success of drones in this conflict highlighted their role in modern warfare, showcasing their effectiveness in both reconnaissance and offensive operations and marking a shift in how airpower is utilised in regional conflicts.
Ukraine-Russia Conflict. In the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, drones have become pivotal for both sides. Ukraine has relied heavily on drones for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), and precision strikes. The use of Turkish-made Bayraktar drones has garnered international attention due to their success in targeting Russian artillery and supply lines. Russia, in turn, has deployed both reconnaissance drones and loitering munitions such as the Lancet drone. Drones are crucial in this conflict, offering both tactical advantages in real-time battlefield awareness and as weapons of deterrence. The conflict exemplifies how UAVs transform modern armies conducting warfare on the ground and in the air.
Israel-Hamas War. During the Israel-Hamas conflict, drones played a significant role in both offensive and defensive strategies. Israel utilised advanced unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) like the Hermes 450 and the Heron TP for surveillance, reconnaissance, and precision strikes, targeting Hamas military infrastructure, leaders, and weapon caches. Drones enable real-time intelligence, improving the effectiveness of airstrikes while minimising collateral damage. Hamas also deployed drones, often for reconnaissance and surveillance, but with increasing sophistication in attacking Israeli targets. The conflict highlighted the growing reliance on drones for modern warfare, as they offer cost-effective, high-precision capabilities in asymmetric conflicts.
U.S. Counterterrorism Operations. Combat drones have been central to U.S. counterterrorism operations, particularly in regions like the Middle East and North Africa. The U.S. military has employed drones for targeted strikes against high-value targets, including terrorist leaders and militants affiliated with groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator have provided surveillance and precision strike capabilities without the risk of piloting manned aircraft in hostile environments. These operations, while effective in neutralising threats, have raised ethical and legal concerns about civilian casualties, sovereignty violations, and the long-term strategic consequences of drone warfare.
Future Trends in Drone Warfare
AI-Driven Autonomy. AI-driven autonomy in drone warfare will revolutionise decision-making, enabling UAVs to analyse data and execute missions independently. This reduces human intervention, enhances speed, and improves operational efficiency, allowing drones to make real-time tactical decisions and adapt to changing battlefield dynamics without relying on constant human oversight.
Swarm Tactics. Swarm tactics involve deploying many drones that can communicate and collaborate autonomously to overwhelm targets. This approach maximises impact, confuses enemies, and complicates defence strategies. Swarms can be used for offensive operations, like saturation attacks, and defensive roles, such as countering incoming threats in coordinated formations.
Hybrid Manned-Unmanned Operations. Hybrid manned-unmanned operations combine human decision-making with autonomous drone capabilities, enhancing flexibility and situational awareness. Human pilots can control UAVs while receiving support from AI systems that automate data processing and mission planning. This synergy allows for optimal control and strategic execution while reducing the cognitive burden on operators.
Miniaturisation and Stealth. Miniaturisation and stealth technologies are enhancing drones’ ability to operate undetected. Smaller, quieter UAVs with reduced radar signatures can infiltrate enemy defences, gather intelligence, or carry out strikes without being easily intercepted. These advances improve tactical flexibility and extend the operational range of drones in contested environments.
Implications of Combat Drones on Traditional Airpower
The rapid advancement and proliferation of combat drones, also known as unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs), have fundamentally reshaped the landscape of air warfare. The increasing integration of unmanned systems has now disrupted what was once a domain exclusively dominated by manned fighter jets, strategic bombers, and attack aircraft. While traditional airpower remains indispensable in major military operations, combat drones introduce new doctrines, alter strategic calculations, and challenge long-held assumptions about air superiority. From cost-effectiveness to survivability, from force projection to counter-air missions, the implications of drones on traditional airpower are profound and multifaceted.
Changes in Force Structuring. This cost-effectiveness has allowed major and minor powers to expand their air combat capabilities without requiring massive budgets. Countries that could not previously project significant airpower can now field substantial drone fleets, effectively democratising access to aerial warfare. Moreover, drone attrition is far more acceptable than the loss of a piloted aircraft, further changing the strategic calculus. Traditional airpower relies on highly trained pilots, whose combat loss affects military effectiveness and carries significant political and moral weight. The expendability of drones means that military commanders can take more significant risks, leading to more aggressive and flexible operational doctrines.
Changing the Nature of Air Superiority and Aerial Combat. The rise of combat drones challenges traditional definitions of air superiority. Historically, air superiority was determined by the ability of manned fighter aircraft to establish dominance over enemy airspace through superior manoeuvrability, advanced sensors, and beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagements. However, drones are now increasingly capable of carrying out air-to-air missions, raising questions about the future role of manned aircraft in achieving air superiority. For example, the Loyal Wingman concept, which pairs autonomous drones with manned fighter jets, represents a hybrid traditional and drone-based airpower model. In this setup, manned aircraft act as command-and-control nodes while drones perform high-risk tasks such as dogfighting, electronic warfare, and decoy operations. Similarly, China is developing drones like the FH-97, modelled after the U.S. XQ-58 Valkyrie, which can operate as autonomous wingmen to piloted aircraft.
Changes in Traditional Fighter Combat Tactics. Small, agile drones can operate in swarms, overwhelming enemy defences in ways that traditional aircraft cannot counter easily. Countries such as China and Russia are actively developing swarm drone technology that could neutralise enemy air defences and fighter squadrons by sheer numbers. In such a scenario, traditional air combat tactics based on individual or squadron engagements may become obsolete, replaced by algorithm-driven swarm warfare where AI-driven drones execute complex attack patterns beyond human reaction times.
Evolution of Air Defence Systems. The rise of combat drones has forced rapid changes in air defence systems. Traditional air defences, such as surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, were designed to counter high-speed, high-altitude threats from fighter jets and bombers. However, drones present an entirely different challenge, as they are often smaller, slower, and fly at lower altitudes, making them difficult for conventional radar systems to detect and track. Countries have responded by integrating counter-drone capabilities into their air defence networks. Integrated air defence systems, such as Israel’s Iron Dome and Russia’s Pantsir-S1, have been adapted to target drones with high-precision missiles and rapid-fire auto-cannons. Additionally, electronic warfare (EW) has emerged as a crucial element in countering drone threats. Many modern air defence systems now incorporate jamming and spoofing capabilities to disrupt combat drones’ communications and GPS navigation, rendering them ineffective. Despite these adaptations, drones are still proving to be highly disruptive. The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict demonstrated how drones could systematically dismantle traditional air defences. Azerbaijani forces used Turkish and Israeli drones to destroy Armenian SAM sites, rendering their conventional air defence network ineffective. This shift suggests that air defence will increasingly rely on layered, AI-driven networks capable of simultaneously countering manned and unmanned threats in future conflicts.
Alteration in Roles and Tasks. Traditional airpower doctrine has been built around fighter jets for air superiority, strategic bombers for deep penetration strikes, and Battlefield air support (BAS) aircraft for ground engagements. However, combat drones are altering these roles in significant ways. In battlefield air support missions, drones have already proven their effectiveness. The MQ-9 Reaper, for example, has been widely used by the U.S. military for BAS missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Unlike traditional BAS aircraft requiring significant logistics and support, drones can loiter over a battlefield for extended periods, providing persistent surveillance and rapid strike capability. This persistence gives ground commanders real-time intelligence and strike options that traditional aircraft cannot match. In strategic bombing missions, drones are also beginning to make their mark. While heavy bombers like the B-52 or B-2 Spirit lack the payload capacity, swarming drone tactics could compensate by overwhelming enemy defences with multiple smaller precision strikes. China’s WZ-8 high-speed reconnaissance drone and the U.S. RQ-180 stealth drone suggest that drones may soon take over many roles traditionally assigned to strategic bombers.
Shift in Human Role. Additionally, the increasing use of AI in drone operations is shifting the human role in air warfare. While traditional airpower relies on human decision-making, AI-driven drones can process vast amounts of battlefield data in real time, react faster than human pilots, and execute missions with minimal human intervention. This shift raises ethical and operational questions about the future of autonomous air warfare, particularly in conflicts where rapid decision-making can mean the difference between victory and defeat.
The Future of Manned Aircraft in a Drone-Dominated Battlefield. While drones are rapidly transforming air warfare, it is unlikely that traditional manned aircraft will become obsolete in the near future. Instead, airpower will likely evolve into a hybrid model where manned and unmanned platforms work together. For example, the U.S. Air Force’s Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program envisions a future where advanced fighter jets operate alongside AI-driven drones in a coordinated battle network.
Evolutionary Process. Stealth fighter jets will still be critical for high-end air combat against technologically advanced adversaries. While drones offer many advantages, they still face limitations regarding autonomy, electronic warfare vulnerabilities, and adaptability in complex combat scenarios. Human pilots bring strategic thinking, adaptability, and situational awareness that AI-driven drones cannot fully replicate. That said, as AI and drone technology continue to improve, we may eventually see a shift where manned fighters become command platforms rather than frontline combatants. Future air battles may be fought with autonomous drone swarms controlled by human operators from standoff distances, reducing the need for pilots to engage in direct combat.
Conclusion
The rise of combat drones represents a paradigm shift in modern warfare, challenging the supremacy of traditional air power. While manned aircraft will likely remain relevant for the foreseeable future, their role is shifting toward command and control rather than direct engagement. As drone technology continues to advance, the future of air warfare will likely be defined not by individual dogfights but by networks of autonomous systems operating in concert with traditional manned platforms. In this evolving landscape, the key to maintaining air dominance will be successfully integrating drones into traditional airpower frameworks, leveraging human and artificial intelligence to maximise combat effectiveness.
The increasing integration of drones necessitates a revaluation of military doctrines, investment priorities, and force structures. The future of air warfare lies in a balanced approach that leverages the complementary strengths of both manned and unmanned systems.
Please Do Comment.
For regular updates, please register your email here:-
Boyle, M. J. (2015). “The Drone Age: How Drone Technology Will Change War and Peace.” International Affairs, 91(1), 67-84.
Horowitz, M. C., & Fuhrmann, M. (2018). “Droning On: Explaining the Proliferation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.” International Security, 43(2), 7-47.
Zenko, M. (2010). “The Proliferation of Drones.” Council on Foreign Relations Report.
Byman, D. (2013). “Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s Weapon of Choice.” Foreign Affairs, 92(4), 32-43.
Gartzke, E., & Lindsay, J. R. (2019). “The Influence of Drones on the Nature of Warfare.” Security Studies, 28(2), 245-281.
Scharre, P. (2018). “Drones and the Future of Warfare.” Center for a New American Security (CNAS).
Mehta, A. (2021). “How China’s Drone Strategy Is Shaping the Global Military Balance.” Defence News.
Heginbotham, E. (2019). “The Role of Unmanned Combat Systems in the Indo-Pacific.” War on the Rocks.
Johnson, E. (2020). The Integration of UAVs in Modern Air Combat: A Strategic Perspective. [Doctoral dissertation, King’s College London].
Thompson, J. (2018). The Changing Face of Aerial Combat: Drones Versus Manned Aircraft. [Master’s thesis, U.S. Naval War College].
Indian Ministry of Defence. (2022). Drone Policy and Integration in the Indian Armed Forces.
RAND Corporation. (2018). Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems: A Comparative Assessment.
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). (2021). The Impact of Military UAVs on Contemporary Warfare.
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). (2022). The Future of Air Dominance: Evaluating the Role of Combat Drones.
Disclaimer:
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.
