Last month, the US President Donald Trump offered Prime Minister Narendra Modi a proposal for India to purchase the advanced American F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter jets. Meanwhile, the Russian defence exporter Rosoboronexport has also expressed its desire to sell its fifth-generation fighter Su-57E to India.
At present the Indian Air Force (IAF) is in desperate need of obtaining a new fighter plane to enhance its existing capacity, and is operating at lesser number, despite threats from its two neighbours in the east and the west, besides the onerous task of keeping the Indo-Pacific Ocean free of any trespasses.
The IAF currently has 31 fighter squadrons instead of its authorised 42. This gap creates real challenges when choosing between F-35 or Su-57 fighters for India’s mixed air fleet, which is getting older day-by-day and requires much maintenance.
The United States, Russia, and China are the only nations operating Fifth Generation stealth fighter jets today. India has plans to develop its Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), but its first prototype will not be ready until the mid-2030s.
Chinese forces will likely have deployed about 1,000 J-20 Mighty Dragons by then, besides exporting them to Pakistan, thus creating a substantial air power imbalance across the region. India’s air defence strategy faces a vital decision between Russia’s Su-57 and America’s F-35.
However, deciding between the two latest fighter aircraft is not a simple decision, says as former Air Vice Marshal Manmohan Bahadur (Retd), as it is not feasible to do a one to one comparison, since issues of integrating the chosen aircraft with existing weapon systems would have to be considered, deciding between the two latest fighter planes is not a joke and also it is not feasible, both these fighter planes claim to be 5th Gen fighters, though technically a lot more is known about the F-35, very little details are known about the Su-57. As F-35 has been deployed in many countries, but the Su-57 has not flown outside Russia.
Making things more clear, former Air Vice Marshal Sanjay Bhatnagar (Retd) opines that to make a comparison between the two fighters and assess whether they’ll be a good fit for the IAF’s requirements, several critical specifications have to be matched in terms of their stealth capability, their avionics systems, their payload etc., and these would be crystal clear only when the IAF conducts a Comprehensive Analysis of the two crafts, besides the challenges posed by the varied Indian terrain from east to west, as was done when the Rafale fighter planes were purchased by India, after a complete MRFA Assessment.
At present the Indian Air Force (IAF) is in desperate need of obtaining a new fighter plane to enhance its existing capacity, and is operating at lesser number, despite threats from its two neighbours in the east and the west, besides the onerous task of keeping the Indo-Pacific Ocean free of any trespasses
Broadly, Su-57 delivers remarkable capabilities with its Mach 2 speed and compatibility with hypersonic missiles. Whereas, the F-35 stands out with proven reliability from over 1,000 units operating worldwide and enhanced stealth features. Su-57 has not been sold to any country by Russia, so far and its combat capability is also not yet proven.
F-35 LIGHTNING II
Developed by Lockheed Martin, the F-35 is claimed to be a state-of-the-art single-engine, single-seat stealth multirole fighter aircraft designed to perform a variety of missions, such as air-to-air combat, air-to-ground strikes, and intelligence gathering.
The F-35 comes in 3 variants: F-35A: A conventional take-off and landing variant for the US Air Force, F-35B: A short take-off and vertical landing variant for the US Marine Corps, and F-35C: A carrier-based variant for the US Navy.
F-35 has a top speed of Mach 1.6 (approximately 1,931 km/h), and a combat range of around 1,500 kilometres, along with advanced stealth capabilities making it less detectable to enemy radar systems. It is equipped with sophisticated avionics and sensor systems, the F-35 has enhanced situational awareness and combat effectiveness. The aircraft is known for its stealth capabilities.
SUKHOI Su-57
Russia’s Sukhoi company’s Su-57 is a twin-engine, fifth-generation stealth multirole fighter aircraft designed for air superiority and strike missions. It is capable of engaging both aerial and ground targets.
The aircraft has advanced avionics, manoeuvrability, and stealth technology. It is designed for agility and speed to achieve air dominance.
However, F-35 is one of the most expensive fighter jets in history, each unit of F-35 costs between $80 million and $110 million, depending on the variant. Additionally, its lifetime operational cost is estimated to exceed $1.5 trillion over the program’s lifespan.
In contrast, the Russian Su-57 is significantly cheaper, with an estimated unit cost of $35 million to $40 million less than half the price of an American F-35.
The United States, Russia, and China are the only nations operating Fifth Generation stealth fighter jets today. India has plans to develop its Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), but its first prototype will not be ready until the mid-2030s
However, the American fighter jet, the F-35 has a larger global supply chain, more advanced avionics, and extensive NATO interoperability.
AVM Bhatnagar (Retd) says that basically, the Su-57 and F-35 fighter jets showcase different design philosophies and capabilities through their technical specifications. The Su-57’s twin-engine design stretches 65 feet 11 inches with a 46-foot 3-inch wingspan. The F-35 comes in a more compact single-engine package at 51 feet 4 inches long with a 35-foot wingspan.
The Su-57 reaches an impressive top speed of Mach 2 (2,450 km/h), while the F-35’s maximum velocity hits Mach 1.6, which makes it slower than its Russian counterpart. Thrust vectoring technology gives the Su-57 remarkable manoeuvrability that allows it to conduct complex aerial manoeuvres. Both aircraft can super cruise, though the Su-57 maintains Mach 1.3 without using afterburners.
The Su-57’s combat range extends to 3,107 miles, which substantially exceeds the F-35’s 1,379-mile reach. The Russian fighter’s maximum take-off weight reaches 77,162 pounds, while the F-35 tops out at 65,918 pounds. The Su-57’s design includes two main weapon bays between its engine nacelles that work together with smaller side bays near the wing root.
Cost is the most important factor in deciding the final choice. Initial purchase cost and long-term maintenance costs matters a lot when countries buy fighter jets. The Su-57 and F-35 show big differences in their buying price and what it costs to keep them flying
When comparing engines, the F-35 has Type Two Saturn AL-41F1 Single Pratt & Whitney F135 Dry Thrust engine, with 88.3 kN Superior thrust rating, with Afterburner Thrust at 142.2 kN with enhanced fuel efficiency.
On the other hand, the Su-57 uses dual NPO Saturn AL-41F1 engines that generate substantial thrust across different operating modes.
Western analysts point out that the F-35 features more advanced engine technology than the Su-57, which still relies on engines from the Su-35S platform.
AVM Bhatnagar (Retd) says that stealth capabilities are the life-blood of fifth-generation fighter aircraft design and will be an important factor in choosing the either as the better one. The F-35 and Su-57 show distinctly different approaches to radar evasion and electronic warfare. The F-35 shows superior stealth characteristics with a radar cross-section (RCS) better than -40 dBsm. This makes the F-35, as stealthy as a small bird or bumblebee in practical terms.
The Su-57 achieves an RCS between 0.1 to 1 square metres, which makes it detectable at substantially greater distances. These numbers translate directly to detection ranges against an S-400’s 91N6E Search radar: The Su-57 becomes detectable at 155 kilometres, while the F-35 remains hidden until approximately 27 kilometres. The Su-57’s higher RCS comes from specific design elements. The absence of S-ducts and exposed rivets and screws increase radar reflectivity. The engines lack adequate protection from radar waves, which gives the aircraft a frontal RCS comparable to a refrigerator.
Another plus for the F-35 is its electronic warfare system, with its sophisticated sensor fusion capabilities. It creates an integrated battlefield image using its 360-degree Distributed Aperture System. The aircraft’s central computer system controls all operations and enables precise targeting with improved situational awareness.
The Su-57 responds with its L402 Himalayas jamming system and N036 Belka AESA radar. Its electronic warfare suite has, Feature Application Radar Arrays Deflected from vertical plane Array Domes Selective signal filtering Antenna System Integrated within airframe IRST Turret Radar-absorbing coating.
Further, the F-35’s advanced computing architecture allows quick integration of new technologies without major infrastructure changes. This provides superior long-term adaptability for emerging threats.
On the other hand, the Su-57, despite its advanced features, has limitations in bandwidth and datalink capabilities that affect its overall electronic warfare effectiveness. Integration with Indian Air Force
If the IAF chooses the F-35, then it will come with major integration hurdles because of its NATO-based systems. The IAF uses a combination of Russian, French, and locally-made aircraft that do not work with NATO systems. This mismatch limits how well the F-35 can share data during operations.
So, the Su-57 makes more sense for integration since India already flies over 250 Su-30MKIs. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited’s experience in building Russian fighters under license would help with maintenance and operations.
Meanwhile, some aviation experts list out several deficiencies with F-35, which in addition to low availability of spares to the tune of 50% and low maintainability compared to the benchmark of 70 to 80% for any modern fighter aircraft, makes it less appealing
In addition, both platforms need different training approaches. F-35 pilots must learn NATO-standard operations and complex data systems from scratch. But the Su-57’s controls and systems feel familiar to pilots who fly Russian aircraft in the IAF fleet. This similarity would speed up training. Ground crews would also take less time to adapt to the Russian fighter.
Each aircraft also brings its own maintenance challenges F-35 will requires new NATO-standard facilities, technology support would be dependent on the US systems, though it offers potential for local manufacturing and maintenance ecosystem, but for that new supply chain would be needed. The F-35 needs new infrastructure investments and special maintenance protocols that match American standards.
The Su-57 program lets India manufacture parts locally and gain more technology access. HAL’s long history with Russian platforms provides solid maintenance foundations. Russia’s proposal for the Su-57 goes way beyond just selling aircraft. The United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) has suggested several ways to work together that match India’s defence modernisation goals.
Russia will transfer the complete package of technological solutions for the Su-57. Russians developed a two-seat variant specifically for Indian needs. Russia provides extensive training programs, which became clear when Indian engineers completed 20 specialised training courses under the previous preliminary design contract.
The manufacturing partnership brings significant economic benefits through several approaches. Rosoboronexport has outlined a detailed plan that incorporates implementation a strategy for joint production with cost sharing of production expenses among partner countries. It also has potential to export jointly manufactured parts with existing defence manufacturing facilities. This partnership model matches India’s “Make in India” initiative, unlike traditional procurement.
In addition, India’s domestic defence industry could grow stronger through knowledge transfer and skill development. The partnership gives India a chance to improve its indigenous defence capabilities while keeping control over fighter jet production. India can produce the two-seat Su-57 platform directly. This approach supports India’s larger goals of becoming Aatmanirbhar or self-reliant in defence manufacturing. The technology transfer would help India eventually produce this class of fighters on its own.
Ultimately, cost is the most important factor in deciding the final choice. Initial purchase cost and long-term maintenance costs matters a lot when countries buy fighter jets. The Su-57 and F-35 show big differences in their buying price and what it costs to keep them flying.
The American F-35A is available at INR 6750.44 million per unit, whereas a Su-57 is available for ~$35–40 million (INR 2953.32–5484.73 million), apparently Su-57 is available at a one-third cost of an F-35, costing ~$80–100 million. Further, the F-35 needs its own special maintenance facilities and training programs, which adds to its total ownership costs, besides the tiny costs e.g. F-35’s special pilot helmet costs INR 33.75 million and the plane needs maintenance checks twice a year. F-35 has proven its worth with over 1,000 jets flying worldwide.
Meanwhile some aviation experts list out several deficiencies with F-35. According to them, it has the highest number of accident rates and crashes for any modern fighters. Further, erosion of stealth capability at supersonic speeds, high temperature and high humid operational conditions, are compounded with serious engine related issues like high vibrations, FADEC control issues, fuel disruption etc., besides structural fatigue and damage issues. In addition, reported loss of control during sharp manoeuvres, serious software glitches like frequent rebooting during flying etc., may make it vulnerable to cyber-attacks besides other serious cyber security issues adds to low stealth capability for reasons cited above.
The government may not opt for either of the two aircrafts and based on the immediate need to fulfil the fighter jets shortfall for the IAF, it may ask HAL to hasten its manufacturing line and it may also rope-in private sector players to help HAL to increase and expedite delivery of LCA Mk2, in addition to focussing on AMCA
Besides high fragility in its hydraulic system and system failure, leads to AC Software system instability, coupled with sudden spike in air pressure in cockpit during operations endangering pilot safety. Battery issues during cold operational conditions are also an issue, while NVC vision problems impair pilot’s cockpit vision capability. And finally, low availability of spares to the tune of 50% and low maintainability compared to the benchmark of 70 to 80% for any modern fighter aircraft, makes it less appealing.
On the other hand, Russian Su-57 fits India’s needs better, a thought shared by Group Captain Ashok K Singh (Retd). It works smoothly with IAF’s current setup, and India’s pilots already know how to handle Su-30MKI operations. Su-57’s detailed technology transfer deal lets India make parts locally. Thus, Su-57 makes more sense because it matches India’s current aircraft fleet and maintenance setup.
Russian offer includes helping India upgrade its defence and build more weapons at home. Looking at the specs, how well it fits in, and what India gets from the deal, Su-57 makes the better sense for India’s air defence. This choice would help India match its regional rivals and builds up India’s defence industry through shared production and new technology.
Ultimately, it might be a tough decision to choose either of the two aircrafts. Based on recent statements by the Air Chief Marshal AP Singh, it could be inferred that the government may not opt for either of the two aircrafts and based on the immediate need to fulfil the fighter jets shortfall for the IAF, it may ask HAL to hasten its manufacturing line and it may also rope-in private sector players to help HAL to increase and expedite delivery of LCA Mk2, in addition to focussing on AMCA.
-The writer is a New Delhi-based senior commentator on international and strategic affairs, environmental issues, an interfaith practitioner, and a media consultant. The views expressed are personal and do not necessarily carry the views of Raksha Anirveda
