JCage wrote:It is upto to you provide the data to show that those airfields can support 272 Flankers. Currently the Scramble site and other sites clearly show they cant. Please educate yourself about the basics of what even ONE Flanker squadron requires before posting arguementative drivel.
No- you tell us what all they have crossed! You cant, because YOU dont know. Nobody does. It just suits your silly arguement to fix an arbitrary date and manufacture evidence accordingly. But that is NOT good enough.
No data. Discarded.
Your silliness knows no bounds. Sunil has already posted an article showing that there MAX production rate is at 17 a year. Your lack of knowledge is also evident from the fact that you dont even realise that the newer Flankers are to use Chinese engines which would entail even longer development, manufacturing timelines not to mention operationalization.
Some data but wrong again. http://www.ir.irkut.com/_data/pages/000 ... r_2006.pdf
Yet you persist with your make believe claims. By 2011, India aims to field another 13+15+15+16+40 Flankers of its own- actual HAL production numbers. But you havent even considered those, or their capabilities vs the PLAAFs older Flankers. Why would you, since you debate using manufactured claims!
When I do the ratio do I include projected Flankers for PRC? No. I did the ratios based on current numbers for both IAF and PRC. So nothing manufactured. If you want to do ratio based on 2010 projected numbers, be my guest. It is you who seem to be desperate to manufacture things.
A-5 radius is 400 km at full load (2000kg). What kind of payload degradation do you see in Tibet?
Are you even aware of the operating height at which that payload is achieved? Please investigate further- I would have provided the data, but your silly arguementative behaviour evokes no reason for me to do your work for you.
What happened? You don't have data to back up your claim. You said Q-5 is not usable in Tibet. Why don't you provide data to back it up pretty boy?
How many escorts can IAF provide vs PRC?
PRC Flankers 272+J-10 70 = 344
IAF Flankers 50 + Mig 29 50 + Mirage 2000 50 = 150
Ratio of modern fighters PRC/ IAF > 2
Once again, you blithely assume that the entire PLAAF can be shifted lock stock and barrel vs the IAF. Were things were that simple! You are yet to prove that even a fraction of that number can be staged from the area- kindly look into the other thread to understand the effort necessary to make airfields transferrable for multi-ops! Second, you demonstrate your ignorance again by assuming that huge escorts have to be provided- all that is needed is to hold off a PLAAF force while the strikers attack, and there is no evidence that PLAAF even has a credible night attack capability! Whereas the IAF will attack at night.
It is totally clear you basing your analysis on just assumptions. What makes you think it cannot? Hold off PLAAF force while stikers attack? And how do you hold off the force by putting ropes is it? Wouldn't you send fighters to "hold off"? And how do you assume that IAF will achieve air superiority over Tibet with the numbers as above?
No don't list the satellite airfields in India because I know where they are. Just list PRC air fields which cannot handle fighters!
The Scramble list is available in the thread. Go ahead and mark them yourself.
No I am not going to mark it for you. If you want to back your argument provide data. Otherwise here is my response - discarded.
Not related. Fusion test of 1998 was actually a flop.
Of course its related. It proves your great source is prone to errors. And about 1998, FAS et al did muck raking about all tests. Please educate yourself about who runs FAS and what FAS stands for.
Wrong again. Goes to show how much you know!
Please do us all a favour and research some basics before posting. If you had any evidence that the PRC had actually made a huge investment in logistics and air to air refuelling (bar the handful of H-6s they have now) to move the entire Flanker fleet vs India *if need* be, your comments could be taken seriously.
I think you are the one who is in need to undertaking basic research. You haven't provided single data so far.
India doesnt dream of invading Bangladesh and Bangladeshs military strength is pitiful. PRC otoh has built up exactly to overwhelm ROC and it will safeguard enough units so as to retain a balance vs the ROC. It will not wipe away decades of work over nothing.
So you believe that ROC will attack PRC if PRC moves its entire air force for fight with India. Well that explains why you think India does not have to fight the entire PRC air force....moron
Hardly exactly. The line was reopened because they needed a counterpoint to strong defences. And FYI all bombers ARE dead ducks unless air superiority is achieved. Please read up about how and when bombers have been used till date.
Big "unless". See you suddenly realised they are useful afterall.
Your nonsense knows no limits- try honesty for a change, it will be refreshing. I said your claims of 400 Flankers are an utter exaggeration, and so they were. You should be ashamed of posting such tosh, but you obviously lack the moral fiber to even admit your mistake. Your Sinodefence site posts maximal figures AND even there the numbers dont add upto 400 but 250 odd- in case you have issues with the English language, odd means a rounded figure approaching the number mentioned!! I talk about serviceability for the PRC because I know they fudge and hide figures - even so I even gave them the benefit of the doubt and assumed a high 70% figure overall.
What is your projection of Flanker fleet in PRC by 2010? Just keep your empty rants to yourself and provide the data. Where did you pull out 250 number from? JCage confusing himself. You seem to have an IQ of a bird.
Learn how to read into context. You are the one who was scaremongering about India getting bombed- all of North India you said! Who cares if the PRC has better SAM coverage to protect Beijing as long as we dont go there.
And what limits PRC from deploying some of those systems to provide coverage for force in Tibet? Just your imagination.
And what does an Indian division bring to the fight vs a PRC unit?
So sinodefence is kiddy site. FAS is laughable. US military report to congress is fillibustering. PRC military doesn't even know basics of fight. IAF Air Marshal asking for 60 squadrons is just asking AF asking for things. But JCage must make the decision. You in one post discarded sources from sinodefence, globalsecurity or fas, IAF, US military. This got to be new record. Can it can get any more ridiculous?
Ah, so the US militarys filibustering to get more funds is now grounds for fear. Grow up, will you.
It is the job of the AF to ask for more. It is the job of adults to understand what is being said and why, and not scaremonger.
Yeah of course you know more than IAF.
Your self gratification amuses me, but your learning comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. In plain English, concern is good- useless panic and hyperbole (the kind you have indulged in) is worthy of contempt.
After your comments above I don't think your posts deserve any more response.
And kindly stop with the fevered one line replies- not only are they rude, your referring to the chinese as chinks and chinkland whatever is downright racist.
Oh yeah...did it hurt you when I called them Chinks?