China Military Watch

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Postby satya » 03 Feb 2008 22:14

but anyway, is the RR counted as part of IAs normal divisions in wartime ?


RR is in addition to regular IA's divs. There has been an increase in manpower upto levels of NCOs to keep numbers steady in parent regiments from where these troops are drawn .

how good is the BSF in a defensive role and urban/mountain fighting ?
how much of BSF do we have?


BSF's skills are honed well considering it has been in forefront in J&K . Its strength is around 170k or so .Add to that ITBP ,and also the recent increase in its manpower that will add up to around 80k-90k at minimum.

I am assuming (wrongly?) that CRPF/PAC are of no use against the regular
PA.


CRPF's initial record in J&K to free up BSF was not that gud . But it seem now things have changed considering BSF is now moving its troops from COIN duties to regular border patrolling on B'desh border .

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 03 Feb 2008 22:14

Singha wrote:how good is the BSF in a defensive role and urban/mountain fighting ? how much of BSF do we have? I am assuming (wrongly?) that CRPF/PAC are of no use against the regular
PA.


ITBF is about 20000 strong. But Chinese also has militia, former military soldiers from decommisioned miltiary divisions, which is about a million strong.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54682
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 03 Feb 2008 22:38

X-posted...
Singha wrote:the ussr, vietnam, taiwan, japan or US are unlikely to cause any trouble
for PRC on other fronts during a war with India.

so the logical course to expect they leave behind their crap J-7 , J-6 and
perhaps the obsolete FBC-1 and instead deploy all their long range frontline ac - Su27, Su30 and J-10 on India. even the PLANAF su30 should be capable of PGM and unguided weapons delivery leaving behind their ASMs.

to house and operate 400 strike/patrol a/c and say 200 bandar types for
local point defence is a giant undertaking and atleast 20 big airbases would
be needed ideally with 2 squadrons (30 a/c) in each. but cramming in 3
in each site they can manage with around 13 bases. there is unlikely to
be 45 HAS in each base but if our IMINT picks up signs (or picked already)
we can be sure they are pumping iron.

there will be 2-tier air defences to guard these vital nodes.

heavy airlift is bad but is being fixed with an order for 35 IL76 already
on the books containing a unclear number of swing-role tanker+cargo
like 2 of our 6 refuelers. I think they still produce the AN12 under some
fake name and have hooked up with Ukraine to develop the AN70 as
another clone. IL76s can ofcourse be ordered as needed - cash is not
a problem now.

I vaguely recall reports of PRC airbase construction ramping up on the
plateau...a short good brought this up:(fits well with my headcount
and basing needs)

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/fac ... erview.htm

China has constructed 14 major air bases on the Tibetan Plateau, and a score of tactical airstrips. These bases give the Chinese air force control of Tibet's air space, the forward edge of battle in the event of war with India, and the capability to fly sustained combat operations over India's north and strike all India's northern cities, including Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta.

Chinese electronic intelligence atop the plateau also confers an important advantage of combat information and battle management in any, air war.

The high altitude of the airfields in Tibet is frequently suggested as precluding effective PLAAF air operations against India. The PLAAF may be able to overcome this problem through aerial refuelling, with strike aircraft taking off from lower-altitude airfields further away, and refuelling over Tibet for strikes at airfields or other targets in northern India.


GD, Can you post here also. Thanks, ramana

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 03 Feb 2008 23:21

JCage wrote:
alokgupt wrote:China already has 400 Su 27/30, 100 J-10, and hundreds of bombers in additional to large number of J-7 and J-8. What does India have in comparision? So I very much doubt India can do more damage to Tibetan infrastructure than China can to Indian infrastructure critical for war fighting.


This is pure scare mongering and nowhere near the reality. First China's J-7s and J-8s are lousy for anything more than point defence. The J-10s are still in IOC, PRC propoganda apart. Coming to Su-27s and variants, there are some 250 odd Su-27s available to the PLAAF even assuming that the public numbers are correct and not overblown, and serviceability figures considered, thats a functional fleet of around 180 aircraft. Not all of which will be deployed against India. Last, JH-7s etc are also affected since they have to operate from Tibet at high alt and take off with a reduced payload to avoid sacrificing range , Indian fighters dont face this restriction. Please, distinguish between numbers and what we actually face.

As far as Indo-PRC confrontations are concerned, we'd be more worried about their arty and the 2nd Arty Corps.


The count here for Chinese Air force (conservative):

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/default.asp

J-11 (Su 27 with Chinese upgrades) - 96
J-10 - 50/70
Su 30MK - 100
Su-27 - 76
J-8II - 250
J-7 - 500

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/gro ... efault.asp
Q-5 - 400
H-6 - 60
Jh-7 - 70

India Air force:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Units/Fleet.html

Fighter
Mig 29 - 54
Su 30 - 48
Mirage 2000 - 46
Mig 21 bis - 56

Attack
Mig 27 - 109
Mig 21 - 81
Jaguar - 84

These are facts. No fear mongering. If the facts are scary then it isn't my fault.

China will deploy J-11, J-10, Su 30, Su 27, J-8I, and some J-7 (of course in point defence). In addition it will deploy Q-5 and H-6 for CAS / bombing. The numbers for Su variants are consistent from all sources including SIPRI.

Btw I agree we should be worried about their arty as well (not nuclear second artillery). But in case we cannot match China in size of army we can still achieve balance by if we achieve air superiority over tibet. So we will have to match CAF in size of modern fighters.

Adux
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 03 Jan 2008 20:44

Postby Adux » 03 Feb 2008 23:43

Alok,

Half of the those fighters are fodder for our missile. But then again their other half which is capable is more than our fleet of aircraft. But our aircrafts are more modern theirs. But the numbers are clearly on their side even if throw out their utterly useless J-7's. Out situation is grim, anyone who says otherwise is living in la la land. We have no infrastructure, we have 2nd strike policy, we have shortage's of officers, we have a stupid media, we a lot of extra-state actors, we have another enemy who is capable mind you, ready to attack us, if china does, Our Naval Projects are late, our Airforce numbers are dwindling, artillary 155mm, the corruption in our system is rampant, i wouldnt be suprised if they sold this country, and then our greatest threat we have the CPM.


PS: I am baffled why we are not buying the Archer 155 Bofors Gun. Its an amazing piece of machinery.

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 03 Feb 2008 23:51

Adux wrote:Alok,

Half of the those fighters are fodder for our missile. But then again their other half which is capable is more than our fleet of aircraft. But our aircrafts are more modern theirs. But the numbers are clearly on their side even if throw out their utterly useless J-7's. Out situation is grim, anyone who says otherwise is living in la la land. We have no infrastructure, we have 2nd strike policy, we have shortage's of officers, we have a stupid media, we a lot of extra-state actors, we have another enemy who is capable mind you, ready to attack us, if china does, Our Naval Projects are late, our Airforce numbers are dwindling, artillary 155mm, the corruption in our system is rampant, i wouldnt be suprised if they sold this country, and then our greatest threat we have the CPM.

PS: I am baffled why we are not buying the Archer 155 Bofors Gun. Its an amazing piece of machinery.


You are exactly right. No matter how you count it we the situation is grim. It isn't without a reason that martians have started visiting India.

Adux
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 03 Jan 2008 20:44

Postby Adux » 03 Feb 2008 23:59

alokgupt wrote:
You are exactly right. No matter how you count it we the situation is grim. It isn't without a reason that martians have started visiting India.


And top of that,

If you do visit WAB, CDF, where you great China watchers like Officers of Engineers and Xinhui. The first being a retired Canadian Col, and other a defence professional.

China is not adding fancy weapons like some stupid arab state, they are figuring new doctrine's, policies etc. They are learning how to use those weapons. Which is far more dangerous. As of now I would hold an Indian General, heck even a Pakistani General far above thier chinese counterparts, we can thank our British legacy for that ,our experiences, our schools and traditions. But time will come when they be ahead, if sit on our thumbs as we are Now. They are absolutely not interested in anything Soviet, they have decided to throw the Soviet strategy out the window in most scenario's, and is trying take western doctrine.

Heck, lets for the cheerio mood, say dont stand a chance. What if Pakistan open's a second front. Can we stand firm on ground? Chinese are intruding into our territory at will. And they tussled with two super-powers when they were a begging bowl and lived. And now they are building an Armed Forces not with India in mind, but the USA. For how long will we obilivious to that.


I dont know how long this will hold true : The Chinese will fight the Indians to the last Pakistan : Source - Officer of Engineers- WAB.

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 04 Feb 2008 00:31

Adux wrote:Heck, lets for the cheerio mood, say dont stand a chance. What if Pakistan open's a second front. Can we stand firm on ground?

I dont know how long this will hold true : The Chinese will fight the Indians to the last Pakistan : Source - Officer of Engineers- WAB.


The answer to above question is a BIG NO! And that Pak will not make the mistake of 1962 is all but certain.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 04 Feb 2008 00:47

alokgupt wrote:
Adux wrote:Heck, lets for the cheerio mood, say dont stand a chance. What if Pakistan open's a second front. Can we stand firm on ground?

I dont know how long this will hold true : The Chinese will fight the Indians to the last Pakistan : Source - Officer of Engineers- WAB.


The answer to above question is a BIG NO! And that Pak will not make the mistake of 1962 is all but certain.


I agree.

The escalation of any Indo-PRC conflict into a nuke standoff is high indeed. If PRC ;takes' Arunachal, we'll be forced to N-threaten a chini city. Failing to follow up on the threat will lose us Ladakh as well.

So if PRC is so powerful, why not make its move?

Methinx, they're scared that'll only push us into unkil's waiting arms. And that alliance will have some pretty heavy implications, in a strategic sense, down the line.

Also, TSP is now in no position to open an India front. PRC is planning something big, no doubt about it. Just how big and how soon we don't yet know.

Adux
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 03 Jan 2008 20:44

Postby Adux » 04 Feb 2008 00:58

vsudhir wrote:I agree.

The escalation of any Indo-PRC conflict into a nuke standoff is high indeed. If PRC ;takes' Arunachal, we'll be forced to N-threaten a chini city. Failing to follow up on the threat will lose us Ladakh as well.


We cant do that, we have a 2nd strike policy.

So if PRC is so powerful, why not make its move?


2 things.

1.One we are appeasing them as much as possible, so why attack.
2.They are not ready for a war of attrition now, they want to engage India under over-whelming odds stack up against India. And they are far more interested in Taiwan now.

and third

Economy,

Methinx, they're scared that'll only push us into unkil's waiting arms. And that alliance will have some pretty heavy implications, in a strategic sense, down the line.


If India wont be pushed by them arming Pukes with Nukes and missles, now gwadar, I dont know what will.

Also, TSP is now in no position to open an India front. PRC is planning something big, no doubt about it. Just how big and how soon we don't yet know.


PRC aint going attack tommrow, but if we continue like this with paltery defence budget of 2.3% for god sakes our threat-factors advocate 4%. Its coming, PRC plan is coming.

shetty
BRFite
Posts: 147
Joined: 15 Jun 2006 17:09

Postby shetty » 04 Feb 2008 04:54


Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 04 Feb 2008 05:38

We cant do that, we have a 2nd strike policy.


words on paper....

Baljeet
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 29 May 2007 04:16

Postby Baljeet » 04 Feb 2008 09:16

Anyone who thinks India will strike against china if dragon takes tawang or arunachal pradesh is dreaming. Military decisions are made by political leadership in this nation. No points for guessing who is the most powerful party right now.
Here is a scenario, china launches deep strikes in arunachal pradesh, moves an offensive division in ladakh. Advises pakis to put pressure on chicken neck and khem karan on the premise china takes arunachal pradesh, ladakh, pakis get to keep kashmir. Maoists in cahoots with CPI see this as right moment to strike, RED Terror becomes RED Government. CPI(M) comes to power, they convince this nation they will negotiate a settlement with china to get arunachal back. Years pass by, nothing happens, people have short memory, everything is back to normal.

Nuclear war is averted, humanity survives. Chinese get what they wanted, pakis get what they wanted. India proclaims to be a peace loving nation holding steadfast to the principles of "Gandhiji".

At the end of day, every one saves face, goes home happy.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 04 Feb 2008 09:42

CPIm is in no position to stage a coup but they can harass and hold up parliament to ransom, preventing vital discussions and buying time for PRC to consolidate before Indian policy response converges.
their media contacts will come in handy to shape public opinion. half the media seem to be CPIm affiliated jnu/du/lse/oxbridge types.

more than military threats I fear the lack of cohesion and a united national
policy on most matters. grave challenges need people to pursue common
goals and here our politics and media is all about dividing people.

India with a smaller arsenal , weaker ICBM force and lack of the desired
ruthlessness (everyone knows this) is not in a position at present to be
holding out city-vs-city threats esp if areas in question are not Lutyens delhi
or nariman point.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10085
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Postby sum » 04 Feb 2008 09:52

Singha saar is 400% right onlee....
The political will be be our biggest stumbling block....
Heck,we are talking of a leadership which couldnt/didnt move a muscle when a teenie-weenie like BD killed 16 of uniformed men in cold blood and handed them back tied like animals because of fear of escalation!!!!!
.....and this was when a "nationalist" govt was in power!!!!! :roll: :roll:

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 04 Feb 2008 11:00

The only strong response India can give to a land attack from China is to sink or seize their trading vessels on the high seas.

In the case of Japan, sinking one boatload of Toyotas at sea will put a big dent in the company's profit. One needs to find the equivalent for China. Perhaps sinking a boatload of walmart crap or intercepting their tanker traffic.

Rahul Shukla
BRFite
Posts: 565
Joined: 20 Feb 2007 23:27
Location: On a roller-coaster.

Postby Rahul Shukla » 04 Feb 2008 23:10

So, North East India falls under Chengdu district and North India falls under Lanzhou; Chinese Military Districts (Wikipedia). Here's a list of Chinese airbases... Clicky (ausairpower.net)

Anybody has a pic/map showing the locations of the Chinese airbases? That will help in the analysis.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 04 Feb 2008 23:27

Rahul, thanks. It seems to bear out my belief that the PRC is unnaturally obsessed with Taiwan.

Just check out Chengdu vs Nanjing and Guangzhao! They are dime a dozen with HAS, actual revetments/shelters, while Chengdu is scraping by with airfields without proper infrastructure. Also, I doubt whether the PRC has invested any substantial effort into just using airfields w/mobile ATCs etc- we are now procuring this equipment.

I think their effort seems to be the same as ours, containment and status quo. If the Taiwan issue is "solved", then we're in trouble since they'll turn their attention on us. Right now, their whole focus seems to be on deterring and fighting the US over the straits.

The one thing that could change things though is if like the 50's-60's- India again cozies upto the US and we have Indian leaders seeking to upstage China. In that case, war is a definite possibility, with the Chinese in teach a lesson mode to put down the upstart Indians who seek to project themselves as the new Asian leaders. We'll have a window period of some 4-5 years by the time that happens since there are bound to be many overt escalations which will come to notice one way or the other. Unless we have another Nehru in the GOI. :shock: :roll:

Raymond
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41

Postby Raymond » 05 Feb 2008 00:08

For Chinese ABs click on PLAAF Orbat
http://www.scramble.nl/cn.htm
------
Call it cliche call it bias but I believe one thing will clearly make a difference
How can a Man die Better than facing Fearful Odds,
For the Ashes of His Fathers and the Temples of His Gods,


Okay now please continue with the discussion/debate.
8)

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 05 Feb 2008 00:19

Raymond, thanks for the source- that doesnt seem to show any of the super duper AFBs being built around Tibet and whatnot.

In fact, given the pathetic coverage in Chengdu vs the other regions, it would make sense for them to pay attention there. :-?

Raymond
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41

Postby Raymond » 05 Feb 2008 00:26

JC, also consider whats on our side from where we can operate.
http://www.scramble.nl/in.htm

There are many reports of lizard building many strips on the Tibetan plateau itself.I didnt find them on maps.Unless it is superduper camouflaged/underground(which I doubt) they cannot be major ABs.To verify I think google earth can be your friend.

eklavya
BRFite
Posts: 1865
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Postby eklavya » 05 Feb 2008 00:58

Baljeet wrote:Anyone who thinks India will strike against china if dragon takes tawang or arunachal pradesh is dreaming. Military decisions are made by political leadership in this nation. No points for guessing who is the most powerful party right now.
Here is a scenario, china launches deep strikes in arunachal pradesh, moves an offensive division in ladakh. Advises pakis to put pressure on chicken neck and khem karan on the premise china takes arunachal pradesh, ladakh, pakis get to keep kashmir. Maoists in cahoots with CPI see this as right moment to strike, RED Terror becomes RED Government. CPI(M) comes to power, they convince this nation they will negotiate a settlement with china to get arunachal back. Years pass by, nothing happens, people have short memory, everything is back to normal.

Nuclear war is averted, humanity survives. Chinese get what they wanted, pakis get what they wanted. India proclaims to be a peace loving nation holding steadfast to the principles of "Gandhiji".

At the end of day, every one saves face, goes home happy.


Please do not forget how the people of India and the Indian armed forces reacted to the potential loss of territory in the Kargil sector in 1999. India is a democracy and our people demand that the territorial integrity of the country is protected, if necessary at very high cost. No political formation - BJP and allies or Congress and allies or Third Front - can ignore this. India today is more determined than ever to protect her interests. I am glad that the Chinese threat is being discussed, as for too long it was forgotten about. India in 2008 is not India in 1962. For a start, we have no delusions about the China. If China does decide to test our political resolve and our war fighting skills, I believe we will be ready for them.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Postby svinayak » 05 Feb 2008 01:02

JCage wrote:
In fact, given the pathetic coverage in Chengdu vs the other regions, it would make sense for them to pay attention there. :-?


Check out Chengdu in the travel channel program



No Reservations: China

Join Anthony Bourdain as he explores Chengdu, China.

Related Searches:

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 05:11

JCage wrote:And how many refuellers does the PRC have? And what happens when those refuellers are targeted, because thats exactly what the IAF will do. So how many Flankers can a handful of refuellers sustain?


What do you mean? All Flankers will need refuellers? How about the air fields in Tibet? Couldn't they support 272 Flankers? What's the rationale for your point for PRC not being able to support all Flankers?

So aircraft which havent even cleared basic operational hurdles will be sent into aircombat. If the PRC does such an excellent job, then what talk of professionalism?


What basic operational hurdles have they not crossed? Let us first fix a date 2010. Now answer this in that context.

I think its pretty clear as to who is talking hypotheticals here! So the PRC will have 400 Flankers by 2010 (a 35% jump in just two years whereas it has taken them a decade and a half to get to the remaining 65%), but we cant consider the IAFs acquisitions intended to take up the PRCs growing profile in the coming years. Why? And what if we start bringing in IAFs upgrades for its aircombat fleet, such as the Mirage 2000 and MiG-29.

There is no evidence of anywhere near 125 odd Flankers being added in the next 2-3 years- enough of this please.


125 Flankers in 3 years comes to 40 a year. Btw 180 Flankers in 7 years comes to 25 a year. Got it? The reality doesn't change by closing your eyes. What's the number you think PRC will have by 2010?

Here is what sinodefence says: "In recent years, the PLAAF began to field newer models of the Q-5 based on the technologies learned during the cancelled Q-5M and Q-5K modernisation projects in the 1980s. The PLA is seeking to replace the Q-5 but a successor has yet been found."


You are quoting some fanboy website as "proof"- you do realise that sinodefence is run by some kid from the UK, right? And what of the exact numbers of these "newer models" and what makes them "newer"? Wait, nobody knows. And how many Km can this obsolete MiG-19 derivative fly with a half decent warload? These details matter, and if you evaluate them, you'll realise that the A-5 is not what we are gonna be looking at.


This is basically JCage again ignoring the facts.

So A-5 are just as junk as Mig 21 are. Will IAF use Mig 21 in conflict? Damn well it will. The same goes for PRC. You might be right on Mig 27, I am still looking at in more detail.


Kindly understand what I said earlier. Does the A-5 even have the range to undertake strikes in theater and return ? It doesnt! Which is why its junk as far as we are concerned, it cant take off with any reasonable payload from Tibet, get to India do damage and return.


A-5 radius is 400 km at full load (2000kg). What kind of payload degradation do you see in Tibet?

Even the MiG-21 M/MFs are far better than this MiG-19 reworked. And FYI, calling the Bisons junk goes to show the depth of information that you havent looked at. These aircraft are both ARM and PGM capable, like the MiG-27 and have one of the best nav attack fits in the subcontinent including a radar able to undertake ground mapping for ground strikes.


Mig 21 are comparable to A-5. No they aren't better. Don't confuse A-5 with Mig 19. PRC had plenty of Mig 19 (J-6) all of which we aren't counting.

Well Indian point defence fighters count. What about Chinese point defence? Wouldn't IAF fly counter sorties over Tibet? Would they use Flankers for point defence there?


IAF fighters are capable of self escort, such as the Mirage 2000's and MKIs, of which we are adding a squadron year after year. And Tibet cant handle all the Flankers, point defence fighters, transports, choppers and logistics.


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

The radius of engagement with Mig 21 or J-7 is at max 300 km. The exact reason PRC has built 10 air fields in likely engagement area.


Sure, and how many of these airfields are actually built to handle fighters rather than being airfields? Should I start listing satellite airfields in India as well?


No don't list the satellite airfields in India because I know where they are. Just list PRC air fields which cannot handle fighters!

Why not? How many of these PRC airframes are capable of night ops? Will the PRC be able to intercept my Jaguars skimming on the deck, using Litening for targeting at night w/o SAMs?


Good point. But Flanker and J-10 are.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/facility/airfield-overview.htm
China has constructed 14 major air bases on the Tibetan Plateau, and a score of tactical airstrips. These bases give the Chinese air force control of Tibet's air space, the forward edge of battle in the event of war with India, and the capability to fly sustained combat operations over India's north and strike all India's northern cities, including Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta. Chinese electronic intelligence atop the plateau also confers an important advantage of combat information and battle management in any, air war. The high altitude of the airfields in Tibet is frequently suggested as precluding effective PLAAF air operations against India. The PLAAF may be able to overcome this problem through aerial refuelling, with strike aircraft taking off from lower-altitude airfields further away, and refuelling over Tibet for strikes at airfields or other targets in northern India.


Oh lawd, FAS. Have you catalogued the airbases yourself or even seen if they exist? If you had, I'd be interested. But sites like FAS etc are so much junk. And other sites quote them, and then others..


Have you? What's your source? This is JCage ignoring facts.

According to FAS, India has S-300s in plenty and a functioning BMD system, its 1998 nuke tests were flops and Pakistan has a bigger inventory.


Not related. Fusion test of 1998 was actually a flop.

Like I said, BRF is more than copy paste. We were debating this years back itself, and frankly, just because FAS or Global security says it is so, doesnt make it so. Given their record of the red menace is coming, theres only a 50% chance of even half of the above being near the truth.


Not related. And what are your sources?

If there was a Google earth compendium of these AFB, it would be treated seriously, otherwise, its yet another bit from FAS..

Did you even check the list on FAS site? Or you just yapping without even reviewing the facts?

This concept of theater is busted. How many fighters will India hold back to deal with Bangladesh? PRC will hold back the same number for Taiwan. Taiwan poses no military threat to China. It isn't like PRC will be fighting war for next decade. It is at max a matter of weeks or months. This the same argument that Pakistanis use about India holding back its fighters to deal with China. No wonder they always lose.


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.


Again useless comments. No argument. No data. What's your point?

As they stand now, they are scare mongering. Comparing ROC to Bangladesh to boot and coming up with a silly analogy to Pakistan (what is with you guys getting emotional about Pak and bringing it in?)- FYI India DOES earmark a portion of its fleet in reserve when it matters, in recent years with buddy buddy refuelling and increasing numbers of multirole aircraft, this is no longer as great a concern.

Second, ROC is the raison de etre for the PRCs build up. They are 10X more likely to go to war over that island than us. And comparisons to Bangladesh- heres an AF which was amongst the first in Asia to be BVR equipped and has its own aircraft industry and local fighters..and is literally a fortified island..but never mind..


Did you check the context in which PRC and ROC were compared? I said PRC will hold back the same number of fighters for ROC that India will hold back for Bangladesh? Btw I haven't counted Porkistan yet. There is a concept of theatre...but it works against India not in favor. We need to defend against Pakistan which has started four wars with India. How many wars did PRC and ROC fight? Zero.

They are reopening it because they realise their vast numbers of airframes (most of which are obsolete) still cant get the job done. The H-6K is going to be used as a missile launch platform. And thats because the basic aircraft is a dead duck as far as modern integrated warfare systems go.


Exactly. The line was reopened to replenish the H-6 air frames getting obsolete. Going by your logic all bombers are dead ducks.

As I said, your comments above are speculation. You have no evidence of it happening, and please dont give me that Wiki stuff of J-11 this, that as proof.


There is enough evidence of this. Ignore it at your peril.

PRC isn't making any claims. 400+100 is a reality. On what basis are you saying it is a "hyberbole"?


Of course it is hyperbole. First you claimed 400, then backtracked when pointed out only 250 odd Flankers were available to the PLAAF of different flavours (not even bringing in serviceability here of the older airframes) and now you are raising 125-150 odd new Flankers in three years time, which even the most rabid Chinese jingoist would demur from.


No you said 250 is a exaggeration by PRC. Now you agreeing to 272 number as of 2007 based on which site - sinodefence! Again lost of gas for no facts or reference. You said J-10 isn't ready. Then you agreed to 70 J-10 being inducted! You talk about serviceability for PRC, and what's the number of IAF?

I haven't done all that deep research about SAM coverage. But I current SAM coverage isn't all that great. Also China currently has much better SAM systems.


You *should* do some research. For starters read up on Sanjay Badri Maharajs article on the subject on BR itself- "Ballistic Missile Defences in South Asia".

And "current SAM coverage is not great"- uh, sure. What with the IA having umpteen Tunguska, SA-6 units, not to mention the IAFs Pechora and SA-8 units, even if assuming a low serviceability add upto a huge number in theater. Then there are the dozens of Flycatcher and Reporter cued guns. Neither of which is a trifling threat to low flying aircraft (if they try to avoid detection and fly low).

And it doesnt matter if PRC SAM coverage is great- its irrelevant, since I am not the one stating that the IAF will be bombing all over South China as you postulated about the PRC having a free run over India!


Again PRC has better SAM coverage. But walla they will not be in a position to bring some of that coverage to their war. Are they that dumb?


MOD thinks China can deploy 24 divisions in a few weeks.


And its taking corrective action to redress that.


What's the corrective action? How many divisions can you spare for PRC if Pakistan decides to play its part?

Well this might be correct. But it is just a small window we have to get our act together.


Why is it a small window? What makes tomorrow different than today, given India will be actually enhancing its airpower many times over?


If you just woke up from your slumber check out US military assesment to Congress. You will know why.

The question is at what rate. No new tube artillery acquisition in a decade. IAF has 33 squadrons against sanctioned strength of 45!


No tube arty acquisition, yes- but Pinaka acquisition- 5 regiments worth, with further orders for the next five year plan. Smerch acquisition- 4/5 regiments worth. BM-21s with new LRARs purchased - quite a substantial inventory to boot.Searcher acquisition- for SATA and Herons as well. LOROS, BFSR and sensors in the hundreds. 180 Soltam tube arty upgrades to 155mm guns.
Could you please check your facts? This is not even accounting for the fact that India plans to n/w all its arty in the coming years, which according to the IA should lead to a 10X increase in effectiveness over current.


Coming years...when?

Second, IAFs sanctioned strength is 39.5 combat squadrons. And in capability, the IAF is replacing earlier aircraft with far more capable ones.

Your statements dont even take into account the IAFs growing reliance and inventory of PGMs, both Russian and others, and its better EW systems and its ability to conduct both day and night strikes.


Check out the NDTV program with Bharat Rakshak on air force raising day. There is a senior officer of IAF talks about how safe they feel with what they got!

So we just need to trust PRC that it will not go for "puran vijay" on India. Is that it? Just trust PRC? Trust doesn't work. PRC one day will seize the opportunity.


Trust is different from jumping to conclusions that they'll attack us tomorrow.

Some amount of concern is essential. But you are taking it to the next level. India is seeking to plug its gaps with some effort, detailing them would be beyond this thread but its not like the IAF and India have slept off at the wheel.


After all that talk you admitted it. You didn't say even if we don't trust PRC it doesn't matter. You instead still basing it on good wishes of PRC :!:
Last edited by alokgupt on 05 Feb 2008 06:11, edited 1 time in total.

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 05:27

http://www.tew.org/tibet2000/t2.ch7.nuclear.html

The first known nuclear weapon was brought onto the Tibetan Plateau in 1971 and installed in the Tsaidam (Ch. Qaidam) Basin in northern Amdo (Ch. Qinghai). China is currently believed to have 17 secret radar stations, 14 military airfields, eight missile bases, at least eight ICBMs, 70 medium-range missiles and 20 intermediate range missiles in the whole of Tibet (DIIR 1998; DIIR 1996c).

China is strengthening its defence by elongating runways at 11 airbases in Tibet. This will enable Chinese bombers to take off with the maximum payload possible and hit targets deep inside Indian territory.

Baljeet
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 29 May 2007 04:16

Postby Baljeet » 05 Feb 2008 05:30

eklavya wrote:
Baljeet wrote:Anyone who thinks India will strike against china if dragon takes tawang or arunachal pradesh is dreaming. Military decisions are made by political leadership in this nation. No points for guessing who is the most powerful party right now.
Here is a scenario, china launches deep strikes in arunachal pradesh, moves an offensive division in ladakh. Advises pakis to put pressure on chicken neck and khem karan on the premise china takes arunachal pradesh, ladakh, pakis get to keep kashmir. Maoists in cahoots with CPI see this as right moment to strike, RED Terror becomes RED Government. CPI(M) comes to power, they convince this nation they will negotiate a settlement with china to get arunachal back. Years pass by, nothing happens, people have short memory, everything is back to normal.

Nuclear war is averted, humanity survives. Chinese get what they wanted, pakis get what they wanted. India proclaims to be a peace loving nation holding steadfast to the principles of "Gandhiji".

At the end of day, every one saves face, goes home happy.


Please do not forget how the people of India and the Indian armed forces reacted to the potential loss of territory in the Kargil sector in 1999. India is a democracy and our people demand that the territorial integrity of the country is protected, if necessary at very high cost. No political formation - BJP and allies or Congress and allies or Third Front - can ignore this. India today is more determined than ever to protect her interests. I am glad that the Chinese threat is being discussed, as for too long it was forgotten about. India in 2008 is not India in 1962. For a start, we have no delusions about the China. If China does decide to test our political resolve and our war fighting skills, I believe we will be ready for them.

Eklavya
Please pay close attention to publicly available information. We lost some ground to pakis during 80's and 90's when pakistanis will build a electricity poles, show electricity bills and Indian forces will fall back. It went on for while till Gen Sundarji took charge. For most people NE States are far out there. "They are chini's or chau mau". The determination you are talking about holds true to some extent only toward Pakis. Congress is ignoring this threat, so did NDA and other before them. How sure are we that SomDrung chu valley is in our hands and how much of it is in our hands? Indo-china border talks are always centered around aksai chin, arunachal pradesh. Whatever happened to kailash and mansarovar? Our own prime ministers' have said, "Why do we have to protect and fight for piece of land where not even a single blade of grass grows".

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 05:39

Great article that does attempt to cover the situation in Tibet

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/creep ... on-20.html

China has also ramped up pressure on India by undertaking rapid development of infrastructure along LAC. For instance, they have developed a new air field in Shiquanhe in Gar Gunsa, which can have strategic ramifications for Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Then in the western sector, along the strategic lake of Pangong Tso, they have built a road from Chuti Chan La to Bush area on the Indian side of LAC.

While India has a handful of airfields near the border, in the recent months Beijing has undertaken a massive upgrade of its air fields in Tibet. In Gongakar, two twin runways have been constructed and Kashi, Hotan, Yarkand and Xinjiang can allow PLA to hit most cities of north India.

According to South Block’s assessment, Chinese intrusions in Demchok area have a strategic significance. “It can bring infantry and armoured columns through Charding La, Jara La and Tashigong,â€

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 05:46

For those who still think JCage is right go through the videos (DD Bharat Rakshak Special). No armchair generals...the real ones - Air Marshal M S Bawa!

Defence Watch - Indian Air Force Day Special Part

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36mqvyJHY94

Some amount of concern is essential. But you are taking it to the next level. India is seeking to plug its gaps with some effort, detailing them would be beyond this thread but its not like the IAF and India have slept off at the wheel.


M S Bawa (listen to his tone):

"We have been sliding down the slide of redundancy and we are half way down...if you don't wake up now...you will not have any air planes to fly...we should get ahead of the problem not behind the problem...you have the number of squadrons but they are TOTALLY inadequate...according to my thinking today the force should go up to 60 squadrons...by end of the century to 100 squadrons..numbers will matter."


Wait didn't JCage just tell you that our "strength is adequate compared to our enemies?" Who is this Bawa? Why he has such an urgency in his talk? He must be crazy or something. Only if he could talk to JCage. Someone also talked about how media is "not letting the truth out".
Last edited by alokgupt on 05 Feb 2008 07:41, edited 1 time in total.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Postby satya » 05 Feb 2008 06:33

http://www.mha.nic.in/ch11.htm#ITBP

Strentgh of ITBP in 1999 = 30,000

( As of last year another 20 batallions were sanctioned , 13 already in training )

Strength of Assam Rifles in 1999 = 51,000

http://www.ssb.nic.in/index.asp?linkid=59&sublinkid=35

Strength of SSB ( directly under IB ) = 29,000 (combat)

I am totally discounting BSF , CRPF and TA from Indo-China Border .


The above number comes down to 130,000 ( including 20 battalions added last year , if doubt pls google u will find DGP of ITBP saying 13 under training ) .

Its , 8 divs worth of specialised infantry force .

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/Orbat.html

IA has 10 Mountain Divs + 18 Infantry Divs + 7 Infantry Brigades .

Now how many of these Divs will be tied down by PA , assuming 3 Strike Corps are solely for TSP .

At any give min. , there r 6-8 IA's divisions for PLA ( rough assessment ).

So assuming for a particular theater considering a 1:3 ( plain field ration ) , PLA need to field min. 9 Div.s for that particular theater .

Another vital thing , IA will be primarily fighting a defensive war so IAF will be primarily enagaged in areas close to border not too deep .

Now way i have understood the above posts of doom ,gloom and bloodbath and deja vu "62 , where we are caught either by surprise or even we had clear intel of PLA getting ready for action and bringing its troops near the frontline , IA +IAF do nothing cuz as per certain posters , whole of North India and eastern India is up in flames by dragon fire and nothing is working cuz India will lose this war of attrition where PLA + PA ( surprisingly will find enough troops in next 5 yrs or so under US eye to poke at India ) .

Alok is held bent on making us believe Dragon is ready to breath down the fire down our neck , its only cuz of its largesse we r sitting , rest is all crap and yes india media is grossly incompetent to such an extent that a whole loss of indian territory will be covered up nicely and oh yes wht about geo-politics and wht about PLA's objectives , who cares run people run . Martians + Chinkies + Abduls are coming downn.

In btw , in mountain warfare , 1:9 is needed for offensive side but why care ,its all gloom and doom , CNBC has entered BR forum :evil:

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 05 Feb 2008 06:34

We're doomed.

Doomed I tell you.

Cheen is so strong. We stand no chance. After Arunachal and ladakh, it will be Nepal and Bhutan next. Then Burma.

Doooooomed.

/Prediction#31

And we deserve the leaders we've elected and the spines they've got. No point cursing cheen if we've been less than prepared. (But are we really? Sure we could've done more, but is what we have now inadequate?)

JMTs etc.
Last edited by vsudhir on 05 Feb 2008 06:52, edited 1 time in total.

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 06:45

satya wrote:http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/ARMY/Orbat.html
IA has 10 Mountain Divs + 18 Infantry Divs + 7 Infantry Brigades .
Now how many of these Divs will be tied down by PA , assuming 3 Strike Corps are solely for TSP .


Well you could have just asked me...here is exact India Pakistan force match up sector by sector:

    Rajasthan
    South 340th Mech BDE Jodhpur 31st Inf BDE (MECH) Hyderabad
    12th Infantry Division Jodhpur 18th Infantry Division Hyderabad
    4th Armored BDE Jodhpur 2nd Armored BDE Hyderabad
    ?? U/I Armored BDE Hyderabad
    U/I Artillery BDE Jodhpur ?? U/I Artillery BDE Hyderabad

    36th RAPID Sagor 37th Infantry Division Sukkur
    11th Infantry Division Jodhpur 16th Infantry Division Rahim Yar Khan
    18th RAPID Kota 13th Ind Armored BDE Bhawalpur [Pannu Aquil ?]
    101st Ind BDE Group Bhawalpur [Pannu Aquil ?]
    U/I BDE Bhawalpur [Pannu Aquil ?]

    South Western
    24th RAPID Bikaner 33rd Infantry Division Bhawalpur [Pannu Aquil ?]
    54th Infantry Division Hissar 14th Infantry Division Multan
    31st Armored Division Mathura 1st Armored Division Multan
    U/I Anti-tank BDE Multan
    U/I BDE Multan

    U/I Artillery Bde Bhatinda U/I Artillery BDE Multan
    6th Ind Armored BDE Bhatinda U/I Armored BDE Multan
    16th Infantry Division Gobindgarh 40th Infantry Division Okara
    Punjab & Jammu
    Western
    7th Infantry Division Ferozepur 11th Infantry Division Lahore
    15th Infantry Division Amritsar 10th Infantry Division Lahore
    U/I Artillery BDE Punjab U/I Artillery BDE Lahore
    23rd Armored BDE Punjab 3rd Ind Armored BDE Lahore
    55th Mech BDE Punjab 212th Infantry BDE Lahore
    9th Infantry Division U/I Location 35th Infantry Division Gujranwala

    29th Infantry Division Pathankot 8th Infantry Division Sialkot
    16th Ind Armor BDE Jammu
    2nd Ind Armor BDE Jammu
    26th Infantry Division Jammu 15th Infantry Division Sialkot
    U/I BDE Sialkot
    3rd Ind Armor BDE Jammu 8th Armored BDE Kharian
    U/I Artillery BDE Jammu U/I Artillery BDE Sialkot
    U/I Anti-tank BDE Sialkot
    U/I Artillery BDE Ambala U/I Artillery BDE Mangla
    U/I Artillery BDE Peshawar
    U/I Anti-tank BDE Mangla
    14th RAPID Div Dehradun
    22nd Infantry Division - Pine Division Meerut 17th Infantry Division Kharian
    14th Ind Armor BDE Ambala 2nd Ind Armored BDE Rawalpindi
    U/I Armored BDE Peshawar
    11th Ind Armored BDE Mangla
    1st Armored Division Ambala 6th Armored Division Mangla

    Kashmir 39th Infantry Division Yol 111 Inf BDE (MECH) Rawalpindi
    North U/I BDE Mangla
    U/I BDE Mangla [Gujrat ?]
    10th Infantry Division Akhnur 23rd Infantry Division Mangla [Gujrat ?]
    9th Infantry Division Rawalkot [Mardan ? ]
    25th Infantry Division Rajouri 19th Infantry Division Rawalkot [Jhelum ?]
    19th Infantry Division Baramulla 12th Infantry Division Muzzafarabad [Murree ?]
    U/I Artillery BDE Srinagar U/I Artillery BDE Rawalpindi
    57th Mountain Division Srinagar 12th Infantry Division Muzzafarabad [Murree ?]
    7th Infantry Division Rawalkot [Mardan ? ]
    28th Mountain Division Gurais 150th Inf BDE Gilgit
    80th Inf BDE Astor
    8th Mountain Division Nimer 61st Inf BDE U/I Location
    62nd Inf BDE Skardu
    3rd Infantry Division Leh 323rd Siachen Inf BDE U/I Location
    U/I Artillery BDE Leh


Only if I could post the Excel sheet I am running here. :wink:

Net net wrt to Pakistan, India is short two divisions in Jammu/ Akhnur and short one division in Kashmir (assuming between Kargil and Leh division we will deploy one division on China border). It has an extra armour division.

Central command has two extra divisions:6th Mountain Division at Bareilly
and 4th Infantry Division at Allahabad. With one division in Ladakh sector we can effectively deploy 3 divisions to cover Uttaranchal, Himachal, and Ladakh. So we are short 3-6 divisions here.

Eastern command has eight divisions which of course are entirely meant for Arunachal and Sikkim. These might just be adequate depending on what dragon throws at us.
Last edited by alokgupt on 05 Feb 2008 07:28, edited 1 time in total.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Postby satya » 05 Feb 2008 06:58

Alok

I know thid chart matching every IA's div. with an opposite div from PA .It was during ops Prakaram not peacetime or not during defensive ops , will it be same ?


Another for a change , war is never 1 to 1( some sort of wrestling ) , it depends on collective firepower used and its effect and main area for thrust and particular ratio of opposing forces in tht particlar operational area.

Calculating as per your chart still , i count 18 Infantry Divs tied down that still leave 10 Divs - 2 Divs for Siachen leaves 8 Infantry Divs . So PLA need to bring a min. of 25 Infantry Divs and i am totally discounting those paramiliataries of 130,000 , pure infantry !!

From your assessment , war will either be so devastating or first blow will be so hard tht Indian leader will crawl on their legs and beg the Chinese to show mercy and will give up whtever they ask or other assessment is it will be long but China will finish out India once and for all .

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 07:05

satya wrote:The above number comes down to 130,000 ( including 20 battalions added last year , if doubt pls google u will find DGP of ITBP saying 13 under training ) . Its 8 divs worth of specialised infantry force .


You meant paramilitary forces...not special forces. Checkout the size of PAP for China (about a million men). And who constitutes PAP? China's military wasn't always 1.4 million. It used to be 100 divisions. The men from these extra decommisioned infantry divisions have been assigned to PAP.

So assuming for a particular theater considering a 1:3 ( plain field ration ) , PLA need to field min. 9 Div.s for that particular theater .


You don't need this all across the battlefield. You need a local 1:3 superiority. Btw how considerate of the infantry who will be fighting the battle...they are being asked to fight against a force three times in size! :roll:

Also checkout official history of 1971 war. See how Indian army won battles in kashmir without such a superiority.

Now way i have understood the above posts of doom ,gloom and bloodbath and deja vu "62 , where we are caught either by surprise or even we had clear intel of PLA getting ready for action and bringing its troops near the frontline , IA +IAF do nothing cuz as per certain posters , whole of North India and eastern India is up in flames by dragon fire and nothing is working cuz India will lose this war of attrition where PLA + PA ( surprisingly will find enough troops in next 5 yrs or so under US eye to poke at India ) .


We haven't learnt from it. Here is the philosophy of americans...overwhelming force (not equal, not superior, overwhelming force to minimize the casualities). But Indian philosophy...we are are half there...we must be ok. Our soldiers are brave and trained. They should hold right?

Alok is held bent on making us believe Dragon is ready to breath down the fire down our neck , its only cuz of its largesse we r sitting , rest is all crap and yes india media is grossly incompetent to such an extent that a whole loss of indian territory will be covered up nicely and oh yes wht about geo-politics and wht about PLA's objectives , who cares run people run . Martians + Chinkies + Abduls are coming downn.


Don't trust anyone who tells you that they can predict when Dragon start the war...because no one can tell. So we just have to be ready for it and hope we aren't caught with our pants down when Dragon comes.

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 07:16

satya wrote:Alok

I know thid chart matching every IA's div. with an opposite div from PA .It was during ops Prakaram not peacetime or not during defensive ops , will it be same ?


Military rule of thumb...each man holds 10 m. So a division (15000 infantry) can hold 150 km at maximum. So assume 100 km per division and now calculate what you need. Now go read official history of 1971 war. You will realize India (and also Pakistan) had much higher density in Punjab and Jammu. So account for the deployment in 1971 and then just match the rest of the sectors in Rajasthan and Kashmir. But I have not deployed two Indian divisions against one Porki division. It is always one for one.

Another for a change , war is never 1 to 1( some sort of wrestling ) , it depends on collective firepower used and its effect and main area for thrust and particular ratio of opposing forces in tht particlar operational area.


But more resources you have more opportunity you have to manuever.

Calculating as per your chart still , i count 18 Infantry Divs tied down that still leave 10 Divs - 2 Divs for Siachen leaves 8 Infantry Divs . So PLA need to bring a min. of 25 Infantry Divs and i am totally discounting those paramiliataries of 130,000 , pure infantry !!


Paramilitary is different from Special Forces. What's the strength of Eastern command - 8 divisions. So what do we deploy in Uttranchal, Himachal, and Ladakh?

From your assessment , war will either be so devastating or first blow will be so hard tht Indian leader will crawl on their legs and beg the Chinese to show mercy and will give up whtever they ask or other assessment is it will be long but China will finish out India once and for all.

Well I haven't even counted surprise or hard first blow. I am just talking can we hold assuming no hard first blow. Who cares about Indian leaders? I am worried about the casualities of Indian troops deployed in 1:3 ratio.

Btw I have from time to time heard of missing six divisions in one form or another. I have heard of mountain strike corp. I have heard Advani talking about need for Territorial Army. It has been mentioned many times by various senior figures for those who know what is being talked about.

As for India requiring 60 squadrons you have Air Marshal MS Bawa recorded on DD News with BR!

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3573
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Postby Paul » 05 Feb 2008 08:48

Russian arms exports to China in collapse:


Moscow, Tuesday, January 29th, 2008: Russia's arms industry is suffering a near collapse in exports to China, as military top brass agonise over which technology the neighbouring country should be allowed, defence industry sources told Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper.

The sources said that Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov would visit China to try to resolve problems in this key relationship before President Vladimir Putin's final term ends in May.

From a situation where 40% of Russian earnings from arms exports came from China, 'recently exports to China of our military equipment and weapons have dropped almost to zero,' the paper said.

One problem is the recent breakdown of a contract to supply transport and refuelling aircraft after problems at an Uzbek contractor, the paper said.

But the main issue is indecision over which technology can safely be sold to China, as well as Beijing's desire to receive licences to do the work itself, the paper said, citing a senior officer overseeing the arms industry.

Russia's arms export agency declined to comment on the report when contacted by Agence France-Presse, as did the defence ministry.

The paper said Moscow's willingness to deliver cutting-edge technology to India, another major importer of Russian weapons, had 'embittered the Chinese generals,' the paper said.

Russia has sought close military ties with China, particularly through the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, while the two countries have often aligned their policies as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.


The alarmist title notwithstanding...it needs to be noted that PRC's arms procurement state of affairs are not that great either.

I don't think they have that many refuellers and transports to haul armor and artillery to the border.

Alok: I think you are ignoring one key thing here. - Logistics and supplies. If North India is vulnerable to Chinese air attacks, then by reverse logic PRC supply lines will also be severly exposed to air attack and sabotage from Khampa tribesmen an SFF operatives. They live and pray to see the day when conflict with PRC comes out into the open.

Every gallon of fuel has to be hauled from Chengdu and Qinghai to those 14 airstrips and railways lines. They will have to devote significant postion of those divisions to protect their lines of communication. Something for them and us to chew on.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

China's ability to sustain warfare

Postby sunilUpa » 05 Feb 2008 09:53

Should a conflict break out across the Taiwan Strait, Taiwanese forces would face a grave shortage of ammunition after just seven days of fighting. Even though China has a much greater stockpile of ammunition than Taiwan, it would also encounter similar problems in a sustained conflict.
The PLA Air Force fleet of third generation fighters comprises 281 Su-30s, Su-27 SKs, J-11A/Bs and 64 J-10As, whereas its bomber fleet includes approximately 48 JH-7As and 117 H-6s. In full-scale warfare across the Taiwan Strait, suppose there were a loss of 20-30 combat aircraft each day, the current fleet of 344 third generation fighters in effective service in the PLAAF could sustain combat operations for only 11-17 days.

Unlike the United States and Russia, China does not yet have the capability to independently manufacture third generation fighters. For instance, in order to produce J-11B fighters, China has to rely on imports from Russia for critical subsystems including engines and infra-red search and track systems.

Furthermore, the manufacturer of J-11 serial fighters, the Shenyang Aircraft Company, has had a production capacity limited to roughly 17 aircraft each year. As for the J-10, it is widely known that production of this fighter aircraft relies heavily on the outside world, as the J-10's AL-31FN engines are imported from Russia, and other large parts are forged following the designs of a certain Western country.

As a consequence, if a conflict broke out and a military embargo was imposed, the PLA Air Force would immediately face difficulties with its insufficient number of third generation fighters.

Taiwan's depleted ammunition could be immediately resupplied from U.S stocks, because most of the Taiwanese ammunition is the same as that used by U.S. and Japanese forces. However, such Chinese equipment imported from Russia as the Su-30 MKK multi-role fighters, Kilo 636M submarines and S-300 PMU-2 surface-to-air missiles are not in service in Russia. Even the quantity of RVV-AE air-to-air missiles in service is quite limited in the Russian Air Force.

In terms of the production of naval battleships, almost all of China's large-tonnage and new surface combatants rely on Russian and Ukrainian technologies, particularly the power plant systems from Ukraine.

Similar to the situation of the combat platforms, the replenishment of ammunition faces the same problems. Indeed, the PLA's capability to resupply its ammunition, is much greater than that of Taiwan. However, under highly intense assault operations, the attrition of ammunition would also be much greater than that of the defending side.

Another problem China would face is that the PLA must rely on foreign imports for its high-performance ammunition, and a substantial portion of the critical components of China's indigenous high-performance ammunition also has to be purchased from other countries. Moreover, as the combat platforms are mostly not standardized, once these platforms are depleted during combat operations and become quantitatively insufficient, the ammunition intended specifically for them won't be of much use. For instance, except for the J-11Bs, all the other Su serial fighters cannot carry China-made PL-12 AAMs, while the output of J-11Bs is very limited so far.

On the other hand, the J-10A cannot be fitted with Russian-made AAMs and air-to-ground weapons. The PLA Air Force has imported at least 1,000 units of RVV-AE (R77) AAMs, which means each of the 330 third generation fighters of the Taiwanese Air Force would face attack from three R77 missiles on average.
During the Ethiopia-Eritrea air conflict from 1999 to 2000, the Su-27 and MiG-29 fighters of the two countries fired the same R-27 AAMs in large numbers, but none of them hit their targets! In the air battles, the loss of MiG-29s was mainly because they were struck by the short-range R-73 AAMs.

In 1999, when the U.S. Air Force's F-14D fighters chased the Iraqi MiG-25s that entered the no-fly zone, the U.S. fighters fired a total of eight AIM-54C AAMs, but none of them hit their targets either. During another U.S.-Iraq air confrontation in January 1991, F-15 fighters fired a total of seven Sparrow semi-active radar guided air-to-air missiles, and once again, none of them hit their targets.

China has imported more than 1,000 H-29T ASMs and H-59T ASMs. Are these too many? Not at all. In modern air battles, the basic concept is to involve a few 10,000 air-to-ground weapons, and the effect could still be quite limited. In the case of Taiwan, mountains cover a large portion of the landscape. Moreover, in time of conflict, the problems of cover-up and camouflage have to be taken into consideration.

During the Kosovo War, large-scale air raids lasted 78 days, a total of more than 23,000 rounds of various types of ammunition were dropped, but only 3 percent of them hit the designated tank targets, according to the former Yugoslavia regime after the war.

As for the PLA Navy, it has only 14 real battleships with the capability to engage in modern maritime combat operations. Its other battleships are all useless metal scrap. These 14 ships include two 051Cs, one 051B, two 052Bs, two 052Cs, three 054As, and four 956E/EMs. During a conflict, these 14 battleships would inevitably become the prime targets of Taiwan's air and naval firepower.

A possible outcome could be as follows: in a lasting war of attrition when the above third generation combat platforms and ammunition supplies become a serious problem, the older equipment of the Chinese military, including J-8Fs, J-7Gs and the obsolete vessels of the PLA Navy would be put to use; hence a 1970s war would be played out on a 21st century battlefield.

This proves the practicality of the Chinese military's concept of "fighting a quick battle." Obviously the Chinese military is well aware of the hard reality that the current international political dynamics, China's own limited strategic oil reserves and its limited supply of advanced ammunition will not allow it to engage in a prolonged war across the Taiwan Strait.


link

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Postby satya » 05 Feb 2008 16:41

Alok

i give up frankly , u r just calculating an overall number of PLA troops without caring about logisitics and for how long can they be sustained . Is it some kind of medival warfare where whole PLA and PLA police and militias are organised for march across the mountains . For a change , think PLA has to win it and win it fast with min. loss and max gain in territory , so long IA can defy tht , its a winner .
If i follo your thumb rule of army deployment , IA's assessment of 1 :28+++ ie 1 front line supported by 28 rear soldiers is either wrong or IA is grossly incompetent to keep such a long tail , though its assessment was validated in Kargil !




As for spanning out whole IA's divs across the Indo-China Border is a most futile strategy considering in Mountain warfare , fight is for passes and plain areas .Now at most of these passes , is IA completely ignoring massive PLA thrust tht can happen ? In all your posts , you have assumed the worst in operational readiness and deployment and gross under manpower on part of IA as for IAF , its sitting ducks , why should it even bother to pick up a fight. To me it seem , Sun Tzu's winning war without even fighting has worked just wonders on your thinking and assessment .

Anyhow this is my last post on this topic . Since it seem you r the wisest person and all those people in Chinese Study Group and likes of Bhaskar Roy and D S Rajan are peacenicks who just not see wht you are seeing and they have wasted their whole life in being avid Chinese watchers if not sinologists cuz they r just ignorant fools .

Mihir.D
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 19 Oct 2007 08:50
Location: Land Of Zero :D !

Postby Mihir.D » 05 Feb 2008 16:58

There are other's who have given up with this guy before. He never backs down.His the PRCPhobia is out of the world ! I wish our politicos had some of it so they could have armed our forces .

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 05 Feb 2008 17:18

Bhai log; in calculating the likely hood of a two front war. We should look at
1) Humphrey Hawksly Wisely - Dragon *.* books
2) Remember that Indian Army will be fighting a defensive action at least on one front. - On that front the aggressor army will have to push against entrenched defences.
3) Chinese sea lines are exposed to India. They will choke the malacca straits. If even a fraction of transport to China is harassed; using both destructive and purely dilatory tactics (search and board) China will be in trouble.

It also assumes that in case of a two front war with India and China -- the geo-political situation will be such that the battle will remain contained with them attacking us and no more. After all in 62 there was a reason that Pakistan did not move correct? It was not all good will.

So matching items for items is fun but rather unrealistic.

Which is not to say that defence procurements should not be pushed forth with greatest urgency; but the current level of Phobia displayed w.r.t to a enemy which cant even get its Su 27s up is really pathetic.

But yes; we should have the werewithal to trounce China like we can with Pakistan. That does not come cheap or easy though.

alokgupt
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 04:42

Postby alokgupt » 05 Feb 2008 18:19

satya wrote:Alok
i give up frankly , u r just calculating an overall number of PLA troops without caring about logisitics and for how long can they be sustained . Is it some kind of medival warfare where whole PLA and PLA police and militias are organised for march across the mountains . For a change , think PLA has to win it and win it fast with min. loss and max gain in territory , so long IA can defy tht , its a winner .


Well I have calculated the number and length of each pass on India using Google earth. On the whole the approximation of a division every 100 km turns out to be conservative. The rule of thumb is not for some medivial warfare. It is from a book written by an american general. While lots of things make a difference like manuever, artillery, surveilance, and most important the strength of the opposing forces for each post because wars are won and lost one post at a time.

If i follo your thumb rule of army deployment , IA's assessment of 1 :28+++ ie 1 front line supported by 28 rear soldiers is either wrong or IA is grossly incompetent to keep such a long tail , though its assessment was validated in Kargil !


Well the rule of thumb doesn't mean that you have to deploy all forces in a single line. It just means that you need those many forces. The pattern of deployment could be 1:28++ or anything else.

As for spanning out whole IA's divs across the Indo-China Border is a most futile strategy considering in Mountain warfare , fight is for passes and plain areas .Now at most of these passes , is IA completely ignoring massive PLA thrust tht can happen ? In all your posts , you have assumed the worst in operational readiness and deployment and gross under manpower on part of IA as for IAF , its sitting ducks , why should it even bother to pick up a fight. To me it seem , Sun Tzu's winning war without even fighting has worked just wonders on your thinking and assessment .


Agreed. But why are you assuming I am asking for uniform distribution of forces. I have mapped the length of passes using google earth. The rule of thumb still holds. With current strength in Uttranchal, Himachal, and Ladakh you end up with too little coverage for each pass. Therefore the need for more troops. Exactly the point you are making about dense deployment if you need to win.

In case you wonder what kind of benefit numbers bring to warfare read battle for Chamb in indo-pak war 1971.

Anyhow this is my last post on this topic . Since it seem you r the wisest person and all those people in Chinese Study Group and likes of Bhaskar Roy and D S Rajan are peacenicks who just not see wht you are seeing and they have wasted their whole life in being avid Chinese watchers if not sinologists cuz they r just ignorant fools.


Well any argument could be ended by saying so and so says it and that's final. Why don't you focus on providing your analysis?


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests