alokgupt wrote: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?
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.
What basic operational hurdles have they not crossed? Let us first fix a date 2010. Now answer this in that context.
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.
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?
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.
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!
This is basically JCage again ignoring the facts.
What facts? You quote fanboy websites, manufacture claims of 400 Flankers out of thin air and you expect to be taken seriously? This is not a forum for making bizarre claims.
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.
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.
Your ignorance speaks for itself! The A-5 is a MiG-19 derivative. Kindly do some basic research before wasting my and this forums time!
The MiG-21 is a generation ahead of the MiG-19 and its aerodynamic performance is far better, allowing it to act in both air to air and air to ground. The Bison is comparable to a 4th generation aircraft in terms of its A2G and A2A capability- if you dont even have the grace to admit your mistakes, dont make up claims!
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.
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.
Good point. But Flanker and J-10 are.
No they are NOT. Please tell us how many night attack pods are in the PLAAF inventory as of today, and what their capabilities are! The only ones mentioned capable with a prototype chinese pod (and with obsolete FLIR tech) are a handful of JH-7s.
Have you? What's your source? This is JCage ignoring facts.
Dont act like a five year old kid please, your behaviour reflects sorely on the forum and the rest of us who have to tolerate your insolent and childish behaviour. Several pages on FAS are choc full of errors. Your bawling about it wont make FAS some great site. Next, you'll be quoting strategy page as a source.
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.
Not related. And what are your sources?
Of course its related. Your claims are junk because they rely on cherrypicked sites and you resort to hyperbole.
Did you even check the list on FAS site? Or you just yapping without even reviewing the facts?
I dont yap, curs do- and BRF is not a kennel. Grow up, ditch the insults and realise this. Your copy paste will impress nobody unless you can provide EVIDENCE of what some stupid site or whatever says. If you cant, admit it and walk on. Or ask folks to assist you with the calculations. All you have done is engage in a silly fifth grade shouting match.
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?
Of course there was utility to them- they proved you were talking through your hat and speaking nonsense. You have zero understanding of how an airwar is fought and the logistics required. You are posting reams of arguementative BS about how Flankers will miraculaously appear without fuel and logistics. So either post about the investments made to field multiple Flankers in theater or admit you dont have a clue.
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.
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.
Exactly. The line was reopened to replenish the H-6 air frames getting obsolete. Going by your logic all bombers are dead ducks.
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.
There is enough evidence of this. Ignore it at your peril.
No evidence- try your scaremongering elsewhere.
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?
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.
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?
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.
What's the corrective action? How many divisions can you spare for PRC if Pakistan decides to play its part?
And what does an Indian division bring to the fight vs a PRC unit?
If you just woke up from your slumber check out US military assesment to Congress. You will know why.
Ah, so the US militarys filibustering to get more funds is now grounds for fear. Grow up, will you.
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.
What a pathetically lame response, so all you could nitpick out of the above - which basically proves you were talking absolute trash, is "Coming years, when". The more important point being that Indias arty situation is nowhere as grim as you painted it out to be.
Coming to when, the ACCS data is openly available- find it yourself.
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!
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.
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
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.
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.