Yeah sure we believe you.. yeah countries like USA,China, Russia, turkey, Korea etc are fool of highest order who are developing their own 5th nd 6th gen fighters.. if all of stealth fighters can be countered by just ADS.. right?
Oki let me break it down for u why we need 2-3 Squadrons of F35/su57
1. VLO 5th gen associated Training nd tactics- 5th gen are not just stealth fighter or a tool of war instead if PAF acquires 5th gen in 2028-29-30 before india then it will be ahead not only in tech but also in the training nd tactics associated with VLO 5th gen fighters. IAF will be left far behind nd PAF will have huge headstart in this regard. With AMCA arriving in 2035 by that time PAF would hv mastered all VLO related tactics again a massive disadvantage nd psychological blow to much more better funded IAF nd 3rd largest economy (by that time).
Thus having 2 squadrons of F35/SU57 will not be just deterrence but it will also help IAF in developing it's own VLO 5th gen associated training nd tactics till the time AMCA arrive nd it will help in achieving parity with ur enemy.
2. Deterrence - In all future war/skirmish Airforce will play the decisive role however it is absurd to assume it will happen regardless of what IAF has why? Ever heard of word deterrence?? Ur adversary's action will hinge on ur inventory nd capabilities
Oki let me give u example of how deterrence work wrt to capabilities.. in Kargil war when we had BVR advantage over PAF.. it deterred PAF from coming anywhere near LOC.. we even had video of mig29 pilots locking F-16s of PAF in bvr ranges..IAF bvr equipped mig29 deterred PAF from taking any offensive now in 2019 when PAF had BVR advantage over IAF with their AMRAAMs it responded with swift retort within 24 hours of IAF bombing balakot because our BVR advantage nd it's deterrence was lost.
Now this time PAF was completely missing from the picture nd couldn't repeat what IAF did (bombing 9 targets across paxtan) even after 3 days why?
Because it was vary of threat faced to it by presence of Long range ADS S400 (IMPORTED CAPABILITY) .. thus S400 WAS THE DETERRENCE!! Nd because of it PAF undertook a mission by lobbing CM400Akg to destroy it.. S400 was their prime target.
PAF getting their hands on VLO 5th gen J35 it will enable them to target S400 or any ADS with less fear of interception.. stealth fighters will also get detected but the difference between 4th gen nd 5th gen is the detection range while 4th gen can be detected nd targeted 100s of km away.. VLO 5th gen can only be detected nd targeted if it's near it's target as compared to 4th gen fighters.
Also J35 will be a strong deterrence against IAF 4th gen vectors.. nd with it PAF will get targeting solutions against all IAF 4th gen vectors before IAF can target nd respond thus it can lead to high attrition rate on our side again huge psychological blow for a better funded IAF.
So that's why just 2 squadrons of F35/Su57 will be a decisive deterrence against PAF nd will help in achieving parity not only in terms of capabilities but will also help IAF in establishing it's own VLO 5th gen related tactics nd training eventually the learnings will be employed in AMCA MK1 when it arrives.
In the humble opinion of this random internet defence nerd, let me just say—you’re not developing your own VLO doctrine unless you’re getting more sovereignty than even the Israelis got.
Israel can preprocess threat data, but the final MDFs are compiled, signed, and uploaded by the U.S. at Eglin AFB Florida through ODIN. They don’t have access to radar logic, NCTR behavior, or the full EW stack. Meanwhile, Rafale, for all its source-code restrictions, still allows India to update threat libraries, integrate indigenous comms, and plug directly into IACCS with our own secure architecture. That’s more sovereignty than even what Israel gets with the F-35.
Unless India gets full MDF compiler access, no ODIN, and its own SDR stack, we’re not building doctrine—we’re just compromising our C4I architecture.
Yes, you can swap in BNET and avoid Link-16. But ODIN still remains. And once that’s sitting inside your aircraft—and that aircraft is integrated with IACCS—you’ve effectively inserted a real-time American telemetry and diagnostics system into your most sensitive air defence infrastructure. That might work for Japan, Korea, Israel, or Australia because their entire C4I system is designed to work under the U.S. umbrella. Ours is not. We don’t outsource our kill chains. For us, ODIN in IACCS isn’t interoperability—it’s a sovereignty compromise.
Now about timelines. The F-35 backlog is already over 450 aircraft. Even if India places an order today, we wouldn’t receive deliveries before 2031–32. And that’s assuming we accept the standard export model. If we ask for ODIN removal, Indian SDRs, and full MDF sovereignty, you’re talking redesign, revalidation, and further delay. As for Su-57? Maybe more sovereignty, but that’s another can of worms. You’d need to replace the entire electronics stack, deal with engine immaturity, and a slow production line. You’re not getting that anytime soon either. Still it would a better contingency than F-35.
Sure, you could argue that even 2 squadrons flown under basic restrictions will help with pilot exposure, and coordination training. And yes, you will learn something. But here’s the real question—what exactly are you learning in 2032 that’s going to matter in 2035, when your own aircraft production is starting? These aren’t temporary trainers. You’re not leasing them for 3 years. You’re committing to platforms that will stay in the IAF for 40–50 years, and locking yourself into dependency for the entire life cycle.
And this is not cheap. You’re not buying 40 squadrons. You’re buying 2 squadrons at enormous cost, and then spending even more to customize, integrate, and train on them—all for limited utility, under software and data restrictions you can’t touch.
Look, this isn’t an ideal world. You don’t always get the perfect response. But you don’t chase symmetry every time your adversary picks up something new. That’s not strategy—that’s panic. Real-world doctrine isn’t always symmetrical. You respond asymmetrically, with layered air defence, low-band radar coverage, passive detection, stealthy UCAVs, sovereign EW doctrine, and kill-chain hardening. You build what you can control—and you build it fast.
If Pakistan gets J-35 first, so be it. Boo-fucking-who. You had a decade to invest in AMCA and didn’t prioritize it. Now you want to retroactively fix that by buying someone else’s jet in 2032 and calling it doctrine? Let’s not pretend we’re learning independence by importing someone else’s logic tree.
Unless you own what your jet sees, how it thinks, and how it fights—you’re not building doctrine. You’re renting it
in next 50 years, if ever. At best it will be blow up Chinese military infrastructure 500km-1000km inside tibet. For that, we again launch from over our air space or Bhutan air space- which is our air space in combat scenario. 
