Su-57 in India? A Fifth-Gen Gamble Between Past Lessons and Future Needs

September 8, 2025 admin

By Sanjeev Oak

India is weighing Russia’s offer to make the Su-57 stealth fighter in India, reviving an old debate. Beyond hardware, the choice is about sovereignty, budgets, and credibility—should New Delhi import fifth-generation power or invest fully in its own AMCA?

India’s defence aviation choices are rarely about aircraft alone. They are about geopolitics, self-reliance, budgets, and credibility. With Moscow now offering to transfer technology and even explore “Make in India” production of the Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jet, New Delhi faces an old temptation in a new disguise. The stakes, however, go far beyond whether another Russian platform enters the Indian Air Force fleet.

From FGFA to Su-57: Déjà vu?

India has been here before. The Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) programme, a joint venture with Russia launched in the early 2000s, was meant to be New Delhi’s ticket into the stealth era. Based on the prototype that would eventually become the Su-57, the FGFA promised co-development, shared design inputs, and eventual technology transfer.

But by 2018, India walked away. The reasons were stark:

Cost escalation far beyond initial estimates.
Performance concerns, especially around stealth coatings, radar cross-section, and avionics.
Limited technology access, with India fearing it would remain a junior partner doing assembly work without true design know-how.

That history haunts the current proposal. Russia is again signalling openness to local production. But unless the fundamentals have changed, New Delhi risks re-entering a familiar trap.

“Technology transfer is often the most overused phrase in defence deals. The question is not what is promised, but what is delivered—and whether it builds genuine capability.”

The Tejas and AMCA Backdrop

India today is not the same buyer it was in 2005. The Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, once dismissed as perpetually delayed, is now inducted in squadrons and attracting export interest. More crucially, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) project aims to deliver a fully indigenous fifth-generation stealth fighter, designed in India, for India.

If timelines hold, AMCA’s first flight could take place by the early 2030s, with induction towards the end of the decade. The AMCA is envisioned with stealth shaping, internal weapons bays, supercruise capability, and advanced avionics—all benchmarks of a true fifth-generation platform.

This raises a sharp question: Should India divert scarce resources into a Russian stealth project whose benefits are uncertain, or double down on AMCA as the national bet?

The Rafale Benchmark

The Rafale deal with France, signed in 2016, changed expectations within the IAF. With its AESA radar, advanced electronic warfare suite, and proven combat performance, Rafale is not stealthy in the fifth-generation sense, but it offers reliability and future upgrade pathways.

More importantly, Rafale created a benchmark for lifecycle support and maintenance standards that Indian pilots and planners will expect from any next-generation purchase. Unless the Su-57 can meet or exceed that standard, nostalgia for Russian hardware will not suffice.

“Fifth-generation is not a marketing label. It is a sum of stealth, sensors, survivability, and sustainment. If any one leg is weak, the aircraft risks becoming obsolete on arrival.”

Global Comparisons: The Stealth Club

India’s decision must also be framed in the global race for fifth-generation fighters.

United States: The F-22 Raptor remains unmatched in air superiority, while the F-35 Lightning II has become the world’s most widely adopted stealth fighter, with over 1,000 delivered across NATO and allied nations. The US has mastered production scale, cost-sharing, and a robust ecosystem.
China: The J-20, now fielded in significant numbers, is rapidly maturing. While doubts remain about engine performance and stealth coatings, China has created an indigenous supply chain that India cannot ignore.
Russia: The Su-57 remains in limited production, with fewer than 50 in service. Questions about its radar cross-section, availability of advanced engines, and combat readiness persist.
Europe: The UK, Italy, and Japan are collaborating on the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), while France, Germany, and Spain are driving the Future Combat Air System (FCAS). Both projects aim for operational stealth fighters by the mid-2030s.
India: The AMCA project is ambitious, but it faces funding, engine development, and industrial capacity challenges.

Against this backdrop, the Su-57 looks like a stopgap rather than a breakthrough.

Strategic Autonomy and the Russia Factor

Geopolitically, India values its long-standing ties with Moscow. Russia supplied MiG-21s, Su-30MKIs, and nuclear submarine leases when Western doors were shut. But the Ukraine war has reshaped the picture. Russia is under sanctions, its defence supply chains are strained, and it increasingly views India not as a partner but as a vital customer to keep revenues flowing.

That desperation explains Moscow’s willingness to talk Make in India. Yet, strategic autonomy means India must evaluate whether dependence on Russian stealth technology compromises its long-term sovereignty.

At the same time, deepening cooperation with the US (e.g., GE-HAL engine deal) and France (jet engine technology partnership) opens alternate paths. India no longer has to settle for single-source dependence.

“Strategic autonomy is not achieved by balancing suppliers alone—it is achieved when India itself becomes a credible source of advanced military technology.”

Economics: The Hidden Constraint

Fifth-generation fighters are not just about sticker price. They are about the entire lifecycle cost—training, spares, upgrades, and availability rates.

The F-35 has been criticised for sustainment costs, yet its economies of scale help lower unit price.
The Su-57, with limited domestic production, risks being prohibitively expensive in long-term maintenance, especially if sanctions disrupt spares supply.
The AMCA, though initially costly, would circulate money within India’s economy, creating aerospace jobs and ecosystems.

The IAF’s fighter squadron strength is already stretched, with MiG-21s retiring and delays in Tejas Mk2 induction. Balancing short-term needs with long-term sustainability is the real budgetary challenge.

Lessons from the Past

India’s history with licensed production is mixed.

MiG-21 production gave volume but not design capability.
Sukhoi-30MKI assembly at HAL provided scale but still relied on Russian inputs.
The Arjun tank and LCA Tejas show how painfully slow indigenous development can be—yet they also prove that perseverance eventually delivers.

The lesson is clear: short-term buys can fill gaps, but true sovereignty only comes from building.

The China Factor

China’s deployment of the J-20 near the Tibet border changes the threat environment. The IAF cannot afford a generational gap in air superiority. Even if the Su-57 is imperfect, its presence may provide deterrence against Chinese adventurism. This is the strongest argument for a near-term acquisition.

But this deterrence must be balanced against the risk of technological dead-end investment. Would a Su-57 deal delay or dilute AMCA? Would it create dependency on Russian spares just when India is diversifying?

The Real Fifth-Gen Leap

The Su-57 offer is a reminder that every defence decision is also a strategic bet. India must guard against the twin temptations of nostalgia and expediency.

If Russia can guarantee genuine technology transfer—not just assembly—it may be worth exploring.
If not, India should resist the allure of short-term fixes and instead channel resources into Tejas Mk2 and AMCA, while leveraging partnerships with France, the US, and others.

Ultimately, fifth-generation capability is not about what India buys—it is about what India builds. Strategic autonomy will not come from being the world’s best arms customer, but from becoming a credible producer. The Su-57 may be a bridge, but it must not become a crutch.

“The Make in India story will ring hollow if India is forever importing stealth. The true leap is indigenising it, even if it takes longer.”