Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ldev »

brar_w wrote:
EOTS is a MW-IR system. Its IRST functions work for the F-35 because the platform can get significantly closer to 4th gen threats. For threats that need to close the gap b/w them and much lower signature platforms you'd need a LW-IR system because you need the extended range performance that comes with a long wave system.
Thanks for that info. Given the proliferation of J-20s in India's neighborhood I am disappointed that the Rafale does not have a dedicated IR sensor like the Eurofighter's PIRATE. Any examples of a LW-IR system......
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:It would have different had that been the only threat. J-20 is still a LRIP platform. If they're lucky they'll have 200 combat coded aircraft by 2032 (12-20 added each year). J-31 is not yet in production so that is even longer term than that and may first go to the Navy for their AC's. But much more capacity is being created by their other platforms. Things to watch out for over the next 10 years, would be the combined J-10C and J-16 production rate. If that begins approaching 60-80 aircraft a year (though it could be as high as 100 given some speculation) then that's a huge qualitative bump for their AF. And I believe they already have over 400 J-10's in service some of which I assume will be modernized over this decade with newer avionics.
By the mid-2030s, I doubt the J-20 will be still in LRIP mode. They will easily have - as you indicated - around 200 of them. And the J-31 is an even worse off situation for the Indian Navy which is looking at the F-18SH and Rafale M, as a backup to the TEDBF. All the Indian acquisitions are fourth generation platforms...while the PLAAF and PLAN are acquiring fifth generation platforms. The battle is highly skewed in their favour. We have no fifth generation acquisition on the horizon.

And the situation - at present - is worse with the J-16 and J-10. As of 2021, there are already 200 of the J-16 variant. They will have hundreds more by the mid-2030s. And the J-10 fleet is 500+ as of 2021. By the mid-2030s, expect another few hundred more.

To tackle all this, the IAF wants to induct only 114 phoren multirole fighter aircraft. And they are not even looking beyond 42 squadrons. They believe that they can tackle the ChiCom swarm with a mere 42 squadrons.

So I still ask ---> What does the IAF and IN know, that we on BRF do not know? How are they planning to destroy hundreds of PLAAF and PLAN fighters with 36 Rafales and 114 additional MRFA, of which there is no certainty. By the mid-2030s, the MiG-29s, the Mirage 2000s and most of the Jaguars will have all gone. We will be left with 272 Su-30MKIs, 36 Rafales, 83 Tejas Mk1A and a few Jaguar squadrons. We are going to lose onlee.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

ldev wrote:The stated objective of the PL-15 is to target high value assets such as tankers, AWACs which the USAF will deploy in any Pacific war. It's only with that kind of rcs will the J-20 or the J-11 radars be able to track at those ranges. The PL-15 will not be effective against fighter sized targets at anywhere near it's maximum range. For fighter sized targets such as the Rafale it's range will be equivalent to the Meteor or less. I am sure that there was a reason that Air Marshal Bhadauria made that comment last November when he said that with the Rafale the IAF has a first shot advantage vs the PLAAF. I am sure that he took into account the fact that the J-20 was deployed in Tibet at that time when he made that comment. However brar_w does have a point in that numbers have a quality all of their own and the Chinese production is prodigious. By the end of this decade they could have an all 4th and 5th generation fleet.

Where the IAF and the armed forces in general lack is forward planning. Today's acquisition planning has to take into account the PLAAF of 2030 to 2040 and that is unfortunately just not happening.
I beg to differ. An article I read stated the PL-15 as exceeding the kinematic performance of the Meteor and AIM-120D and has the largest NEZ of around 150+ km. The missile you are referring to is the PL-21 with a range of 400+ km. The IAF will lose all her aircraft against the PL-15, including the Rafale. Nothing will survive. What is the IAF going to do with Meteor? :lol:

And the situation is no different with the F-15EX, F-21 or F-18SH. Even AIM-120D will not help here. I also read on a Chinese military forum, that the PL-15 is their "high value asset" killer. That has a range of 400 km. The Chinese have overcome the laws of R&D, Science, Physics and Math and have even compressed time & space to produce a world class military....exceeding even that of the United States. And we in India are giddy over 36 Rafales and 114 MRFA. Shame, Shame.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:By the mid-2030s, I doubt the J-20 will be still in LRIP mode. They will easily have - as you indicated - around 200 of them. And the J-31 is an even worse off situation for the Indian Navy which is looking at the F-18SH and Rafale M, as a backup to the TEDBF.
It takes 12-15 years to field a 5th generation fighter even if you've flown a prototype. It took the USN 14 and 17 years to field the F-35B and F-35C respectively. Stealth in an AC environment is not easy. J-31 for their Navy will take time. Yes they will have over 200 J-20's with several dedicated to their Maritime denial mission in the East leaving a smaller number to rotate through the West. That's certainly a challenge and I'm not trying to downplay that as a near term one. It is more of a medium-long term challenge though as it will take them some time to field a much larger inventory where they can have larger numbers spread around covering both East and West. But there other platforms will be available in higher numbers (hence more can be committed to the west) and they keep iteratively improving them. I'm still trying to figure out their planned production rates based on some speculation, some OSINT analysis/reporting and other means but it is difficult to narrow down. So far, I've seen 6 J-10C's and J-14's a month being written about (3 aircraft of each type). So that's 72 4+ generation Multi-role fighters a year. Could be more, could be less but 100-150 combat aircraft a year would be a good range to put for them (all types combined not just these 2). These are just two of several types they field but I'd consider them as their best 4+ gen at the moment and these will be available/seen in much higher quantities.
Last edited by brar_w on 14 Sep 2021 01:37, edited 1 time in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Brar, I beg to differ. This is China we are talking about. None of what you have said above, actually applies to them. Everything they make, works perfectly the first time. Please prove to me otherwise. As per the PLAAF, their J-20 will easily defeat the F-22 in combat. I have no reason to doubt that.

And by the mid-2030s, the J-20 will be a formidable fighter with around 200+ examples in service. Why the IAF is insisting on inducting fourth generation platforms in the 2020s and 2030s is a deep mystery. There needs to be a serious shake up of Indian military leadership. I would cancel all fourth generation fighter acquisitions - for the IAF and IN - and design mijjiles with around 500+km range, with NEZ of 250+km with a 35+ km boost mode for emergencies. And acquire an all fifth generation fighter force.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

I hope everyone realizes that my past few posts have been filled with sarcasm. For anyone who is not following the thread, they will rightfully believe I have been brainwashed by the ChiComs.

What the threat perceptions are from the ChiComs DO NOT correlate to what the IAF and IN are acquiring or planning to acquire. That is fundamentally the fact of the matter. No matter which way we slice it, that is the truth.

*114 MRFA + 36 Rafales to fight against hundreds, if not a few thousand of PLAAF combat aircraft. Why is the IAF doing that?

*What is it about the Rafale that gives the IAF the confidence that they will have an advantage against a numerically superior PLAAF?

*Why is the IAF insisting on 42 squadrons - and not more - to conduct full spectrum of operations?

*Why is the IAF backing the Tejas Mk2 development? Why is the IN backing TEDBF development?

*Why is the IN insisting on inducting a fourth generation naval fighter?

*Why is the IAF insisting on inducting 114 fourth generation fighters?

A few things to think about perhaps?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Notice the date of this article from last year? At that time, the IAF had just a handful of Rafales in her inventory. Barely enough to count on two hands. Today we have two squadrons raised, with the second squadron at Hasimara AFS getting another nine Rafales in three months.

It is irresponsible on the part of the Air Chief to talk in such a braggadocio manner? What does the Air Chief know that we don't know? :)

Numerically speaking, the PLAAF has the advantage right now. Why not attack? Why the hesitation from the ChiComs?

China cannot get the better of us: Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria
https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 415_1.html
05 October 2020
Addressing the media on Monday in the run-up to the 88th Air Force Day on October 8, the Indian Air Force (IAF) chief said: “We are firmly in place to handle any contingency”. He said there is no scenario, in any conflict situation, in which China can get the better of India.
We conduct bilateral and multilateral exercises with leading air forces of the world and let me share with you with confidence that operationally we are amongst the best,” said the air chief, referring to the IAF’s strong performance in demanding international exercises, such as Red Flag, which the US conducts.
He admitted the Chinese air force’s long-range strike capability was an “area of strength,” but their vaunted fifth-generation J-20 fighter was still a work in progress, with advanced weapons and sensors, but no indigenous engine.
Glossing over the IAF’s dwindling fighter squadrons, Bhadauria said, “Our offensive strike capability has been honed with upgradations and new inductions of weapons and platforms, ably supported by combat enablers and a networked decision-making environment.”
Yet, he candidly admitted that “even if we move at the fastest possible pace”, the IAF would not reach its authorised 42 squadrons in the coming decade — “36-38 squadrons would be an achievement.
The air chief was on surer ground when he lauded the IAF’s airlift capability. “We have the largest strategic airlift capability in our region comprising IL-76, C-17 Globemaster and C-130 Super Hercules platforms,” he said.
[ and we were told to dhoti shiver because of their Xi'an Y-20s :lol: ]
Referring to the induction of a large number of Russian Mi-17V5 and American Chinook CH-47F transport helicopters, Bhadauria pointed out: “We have significantly enhanced our heli-lift capabilities with our helicopter inductions.In fact, the IAF’s tactical airlifters enabled the army to quickly block Chinese troops from trespassing even deeper across the Line of Actual Control (LAC). “Our airlift capability was also brought into focus as we supported the Indian Army in rapid mobilisation of troops and equipment to [the] operational area at a pace which our adversary didn’t expect,” said the IAF chief. Suggesting the tactical airlift fleet would remain a priority, Bhadauria said, “The AN-32 [medium transport] fleet is halfway through its upgradation. Similar plans are in place for the [heavy lift] IL-76 fleet as well.”
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by YashG »

Rakesh wrote:
It is irresponsible on the part of the Air Chief to talk in such a braggadocio manner? What does the Air Chief know that we don't know? :)

Numerically speaking, the PLAAF has the advantage right now. Why not attack? Why the hesitation from the ChiComs?

China cannot get the better of us: Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhadauria
Admiral you have put up the premise that iaf and in know something that we don’t and therefore feel comfortable chasing 42 sqd goal with mostly 4+ gen aircrafts.

However even if they do feel alarmed About the buildup, how wise would it be to say that publicly? It will both lower the morale of forces and give chicom a mental leg up in psyops.

As a service chief i expect him to say what he is saying in the current situation even if the situation is adverse. That how you don’t lose a battle even before entering one.

Therefore his words play a role but not confirm that iaf has some info up their sleeve that will help them tackle the chicom 4th Gen swarm.

Also we all know j20/j31 is definitely not what the Chinese propaganda says. So j20/31 threat is an ‘if’ but the numerical j10/11 that is definite.

So against a definite 4th gen threat , iaf is doing wise to acquire more 4th gen aircrafts. But it is the quantitative aspect of this 4th gen threat that were lacking on. And hence my constant harp that we produce mk1a or mk2 by hundreds asap on war footing. Invoke war production rules if need be.

Regarding the uncertain 5th gen the only solution goes through the lca experience and mic towards amca. So again no real choices out there.

And for iaf what they feel, the action chain is not with them alone - pm/pmo/mod and finances r involved. So why come and appear weak in public when that will anyways not help.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

YashG, what the Chief is saying above only emphasizes what the IAF is inducting or planning to induct.

This quantitative swarm threat that the ChiCom is putting up does not translate to what the IAF is inducting ---> 114 MRFA + 272 upgraded Su-30MKIs + 36 Rafales + 83 Tejas Mk1A. Of that, only the last two are guaranteed to come. But if I include the 114 MRFA, that works out to a total of just over 500 aircraft. If one adds 100+ Tejas Mk2 to that list, it will increase to 600+ aircraft. But that is it. There is no other manned aircraft in the pipeline that the IAF is planning to acquire.

The J-10 alone stands at 500+ and that is just one aircraft type and that is the reality of 2021. There are a host of other Russian clones i.e. J-11, J-16, etc.

So what else is the IAF inducting really? Where are the hundreds of aircraft that the IAF has on order? Does anyone know? And as per the IAF themselves, if they get these aircraft listed above...they are confident that they can stand up to the ChiCom swarm.

The PLAAF is building aircraft in hundreds of each type (J-10, J-16, J-20, etc) and here the IAF has no plans to induct numbers beyond 42 squadrons, of which the Chief himself is saying that if they get to 36 - 38 squadrons it will be an achievement! So when we talk about the quantitative aspect of this 4th generation threat that the IAF is facing, it should be met with a similar quantitative response? Is that not the expectation? But where are the orders of hundreds of aircraft of each type (Rafale, Tejas Mk1, Mk1A, Mk2)?

When the PAF acquired 40 F-16s, the IAF response was 40 Mirage 2000s and 60+ MiG-29s! Today, the PLAAF is inducting hundreds of each type of fourth generation fighters (and a couple hundred fifth generation J-20s) and the IAF response is 114 MRFA + 272 upgraded Su-30MKIs + 36 Rafales + 83 Tejas Mk1A. That's it? Does Air HQ even know how to count?

Or is there more to the threat of the quantitative aspect that we on BRF are all overlooking? What is it that Air HQ knows that they are confident with 42 squadrons for full spectrum of operations, a term that Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa Sir said? Rhetorical question onlee. Some things are best left for the PLAAF to find out :)
VenkataS
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 03:38

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by VenkataS »

Our economy and consequently the IAF budget is the primary reason for our current squadron strength.
If we want to increase our squadron strength and be competitive with respect to our neighbor the only way forward is to quadruple our economy over the next 10 years.

That will directly translate to an increased IAF budget and a sustained increase in squadron strength over the next 10-20 years.
So it is the economy that we should be blaming for our current squadron strength not a particular person.
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by YashG »

Admiral, I fully see your reasoning.

China inducting in 100s -> IAF is not -> But IAF is still confident and nt planning to induct in 100s -> there is something IAF knows that will help them fight 1000s of plaaf planes.

& I hope ur right because i will also be happy and comfortable to believe that. But I’m trying not to make hope my judgement.
So consider alternative lines if reasonings too -

China inducting in 100s -> IAF is not -> IAF wants to reach 60 sqd -> GoI has made it clear no money -> IAF not raising alarm publicly right now -> IAF content on reaching 42 sqd since path to 60 also goes through 42

China inducting in 100s -> IAF is not -> IAF wants to reach 60 sqd -> No active traction for the thought in MoD,GoI circles beyond chai-biskoot -> IAF sees no point in addressing the issue, sticks to 42 as of now

And making strategic blunders isnt new to our system, when we didnt buy more mirages or took 2 decades fr 126 mrfa. Time to buy mirages was when mirage line was closing down.

And i think time to ramp up lca numbers is now not later and we might be doing something similar by being less ambitious with tejas program. We should target 50 lca mk1a mk2 combined per year - manufacturing capacity. We may make less is fine, we will loose money on idle capacity is okay too- it would be payments we make to our MIC at the end. It wont be so much but atleast it will be a good insurance.
Last edited by YashG on 14 Sep 2021 10:22, edited 1 time in total.
hgupta
BRFite
Posts: 467
Joined: 20 Oct 2018 14:17

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by hgupta »

Rakesh,

I understand where you are coming from. However, consider this graph below for the operating costs of a modern fighter jet in the USAF.

Image

Look at the operating costs for a 5th generation fighter and even a 4.5 generation fighter. Take it as you will when it comes to considering the operational costs of PLAAF 5th generation planes. If you consider PLAAF having 275 5th generation fighter and (I am being generous( PLAAF's operating cost would be $10m per plane per year. That translate into $2.75 Billion in operating costs alone per year. It does not include the cost of acquisition or training or personnel. After factoring these costs I would take it up to $10 billion per year to have and maintain a 275 5th generation fighter jet fleet per year. Look at the operational budgets for Israel Air force and JSDAF and you will see what I am talking about You might think that China has a huge budget that can handle these costs due to its size. Sure but you should know that there is an upper limit to how many planes that China can financially support per year. Based on this, I do not see PLAAF operating 1000s of 5th generation planes. They would be bankrupt like Soviet Union. One more thing to add, China import massive quantities of oil and only has 25 billion barrels of oil in reserve. China will not have the luxury of managing any financial shocks to the oil price. Having a 2000 fighter fleet means massive consumption of oil on a yearly basis and 5th generation fighter jets are more maintenance intensive translating into high maintenance costs. Why do you see reports of PLAAF flying planes only less than 100 hours a year and they don't fly the old planes that much. They mostly fly the more modern planes but nowhere near the level of NATO forces. Furthermore, why do you see news report of USAF considering cheaper options such as purchasing more F-15 fighters and even more F-16 fighters and seeking to reduce the numbers of F-35s planes and they have the biggest budget in the world and will continue to have that for the next 15 years? Because the USAF is finally realizing what it means to financially support 1000s of 5th generation fighter planes.

Based on the above, I would be considering of the financial position that IAF is in and understand why IAF may only want to induct 300+ planes in the next 10 years.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Pratyush »

HGupta,

Good summary from you regarding the cost of ownership and maintenance for a modern large airforce.

Such expenses are relevant to understand a potential operational capacity of an airforce.

Having said so, looking the kind of ambitions that PRC has and the kind of pain a modern day PRC is prepared to endure in order to achieve the strategic aims. I will say that they would be quite open to incurring such expenses.

Also given the development of PRC's civilian technical industrial base I will say that training of aircrew will not be a prohibitory expense. As most of the complex multiple aircraft operational training can be accomplished using networked simulators and virtual reality environments. The actual operational flying can be limited to keeping the pilots current in the air. Or training needed to validate the lessons from the simulators. This will greatly reduce operational flying expenses.

I admit that any technically competent force can execute such solutions to reduce expenses.

What that means is that an ambitious PLAF buildup is not going to be limited due to an expensive training and maintenance program.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Cain Marko »

What I gather from the discussion so far. IAF does not take the PLAAF 5 GEN threat too seriously. Yet.

When the PLAAF/PAF seriously starts to threaten with such platforms, I fully expect some emergency procurement, in case the AMCA is not available at said time.

What that emergency purchase will be is anybody's guess. I think that we'll see iaf accepting the inevitable around 2026-30 when the j20 types are coming in hot. Then it'll be a purchase of JSF, if available or the pakfa, which should have matured by then. Quantity? Minimum 36.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

Lets stop talking up imports here at least. Talking about an "emergency import" is pointless and biased to keep India hooked on imports. For a new type, the selection process is at least a decade and then price negotiation of 5 years plus delivery starting 3 years from signing. I leave you to consider how rapid "emergency imports" can be in this context.

MK2 and AMCA should receive full IAF support by not asking for unobtainium and in leading the project management. In the interim, expanding MK1 and MK1A numbers provide a realistic chance to come closer to the target of 42. But with 12-16 aircraft or less produced annually, IAF will forever be chasing its tail. And if it looks for imports to fill up the gap, the costs will cripple the economy. The only way forward is to shut the ridiculously expensive imports and build your own.

Also, with the successful development of a complex system like a 4.5 gen fighter, India should work on rapidly completing the Saras project.
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4712
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by nam »

The key to fighting Chini 5G fighters is to target their's AWACS. Without an AWACS support, the 5G fighters have to switch on their radar, allowing detection of their location.

If they use J10/11/16/Su35 radar, then you target these.

Without knocking off IAF, no amount of 5G fighter is going to help Chinis win a fight.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

hgupta wrote:Rakesh,

I understand where you are coming from. However, consider this graph below for the operating costs of a modern fighter jet in the USAF.
See THIS. USAF O&S costs are relevant to a very few other operators given the expeditionary setup of the force and the costs unique to it. Besides the basing, and depot footprint required to execute the expeditionary mission, the USAF also adds the unit level manpower costs to its CPFH calculations which are dramatically different b/w the US and China. There are also small fleets with fixed costs that get spread over fewer frames and flight hours thus inflating CPFH or CPTPY numbers significantly. B-2 is one example of this as just 20-21 exist but its a strategic tool and thus has conventional and strategic fixed costs that get distributed to a small fleet. In reality even if the B-2 costs 2-3 times the B-52 at the macro level (because of these nuances) its much better given START limitations for example (that justify capability over cost because you're limited in terms of how many nuke capable bombers you can have).

The USAF has never considered replacing the F-35 with F-15 (which isn't a cheaper option in any scenario). The F-15EX aircraft it is buying are replacing F-15C's for the Air National Guard that were to have been re-winged and used for another 10-15 years at least (F-35 was never planned to replace them). Instead of doing those structural upgrades, they've decided to retire them (they are amongst the oldest operational F series aircraft in the USAF) and buy new F-15EX's instead. The F-15EX works in that because it utilizes the same depot level infrastructure, the same schoolhouse, the same transition squadrons, and training resources. An F-15C unit can transition to F-15EX in months vs year of base infra upgrade, and training needed to transition a unit to F-35A. The other cheaper options the USAF is considering are more around the aircraft like the A-10 etc that don't need to be capable of the high end fight. There they can probably get a F-16 variant that's a lot cheaper to operate and replace that mission just as well as an F-22 or F-35 could ever could. They have never said that the F-16's they operate should be replaced with anything besides the F-35A (which is designed to take over as the multi-role strike fighter replacement for the Fighting Falcon). They've already replaced around 300 F-16's with F-35A's by now. Setting the F-15EX aside (ANG purchase where a decision was made to retire the F-15C instead of upgrading it), the only other lower cost platform they're considering is to support aircraft that are there for COIN or lower end missions. This is primarily driven by the money needed to begin buying the 6th generation fighter which should enter low rate production before the end of the decade. In addition to buying a lower end fighter to make room for it, they are also going to begin retiring initial F-22A's starting the early 2030s as their replacement would be in production.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:This quantitative swarm threat that the ChiCom is putting up does not translate to what the IAF is inducting ---> 114 MRFA + 272 upgraded Su-30MKIs + 36 Rafales + 83 Tejas Mk1A. Of that, only the last two are guaranteed to come. But if I include the 114 MRFA, that works out to a total of just over 500 aircraft. If one adds 100+ Tejas Mk2 to that list, it will increase to 600+ aircraft. But that is it. There is no other manned aircraft in the pipeline that the IAF is planning to acquire.
The IAF must have a target number for Tejas MK2 that it would want to buy over the next 10-15 years. Likely some sort of AMCA numbers must also be featuring in its medium to long term force planning. At one point, it may have also included some number of Su-57/FGFA's in its post 2025, or post 2030 force-mix before the MOD withdrew from the program back in 2017/2018. All these are or were at one point programs that the IAF was (PAKFA) or still does (MK2, and AMCA) expect to get a return on (in terms of having them available at a near, medium, or long term). While it may not have explicitly spelled that out via the media or a press release/statement, it doesn't mean that it doesn't expect to or didn't expect to begin inducting some or all of these aircraft when they were made available.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Thank you to VenkataS, YashG, hgupta, Pratyush, Vivek K and Cain-ji for your comments. All valid and noted.

Please see this below. The Chief gave a press conference (or perhaps it was a press gaggle...does not matter). See what the Air Chief is saying.

Looking at procuring 350 aircraft over next two decades: Air Chief Marshal Bhadauria
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 354445.ece
08 Sept 2021
“Looking at the northern neighbour, we have to have niche technologies which must be built in-house by our own industry for reasons of security,” the IAF chief said.
Emphasising that India becoming self-reliant in the defence sector is crucial for dealing with various challenge, Air Chief Marshal Bhadauria said the IAF is looking at procuring around 350 aircraft from within the country in the next two decades. At the same time, he noted that it is a rough projection.
All of you are on the same page when it comes to inducting large numbers of aircraft. That is a view point, that the Air Chief is also saying. However, whatever aircraft that are coming have to fit within the ORBAT of 42 squadrons. This same Chief is stating that if the IAF gets to 36 - 38 squadrons - in this decade - it will be an achievement. So before we even think of moving to anything higher than 42 squadrons, it is imperative that the IAF reaches 42 first. Why talk of 50, 55 and 60 squadrons, when the IAF is struggling to reach to 42?

Next is the quadrupling of the economy, a point which VenkataS raised. And VenkataS is absolutely right. The economy will grow and that too by leaps and bounds. COVID was an aberration on the Indian (and global) economy, but the Indian economy is only set to grow exponentially. The issue is not with the economy growing. The problem lies in how much of that economic growth will translate into actual money set aside for acquisitions for the armed forces. In a country where we are arguing over a 65,000 ton aircraft carrier and ordering local maal in piecemeal orders (i.e. 83 Tejas Mk1A), are we honestly expecting our political leaders to listen to the IAF to increase squadron strength beyond 42?

The economy only grew between when MMRCA was launched in 2007 to when the L1 was down selected on 31 Jan 2012. On what basis did then Defence Minister AK Antony then say in 2014, that there was no money to purchase 126 phoren fighter aircraft? When his successors - Arun Jaitley and Manohar Parrikar - also said the same thing in the years post 2014, the economy was still growing onlee. But there was never money for this acquisition. Why? China was a serious threat to India, when the late George Fernandes called China enemy no 1 in 1998. And since 1998, the threat from China has only increased. But where is the money for acquisitions? We have a contest for 114 MRFA going on right now. Why is the govt not moving that process at break neck speed?

And as much as I would like to see the BJP win the 2024, 2029 and future general elections....politics never work like that. Every party has ebbs and flows. No political party will sit in power forever. When the Kangaroos come in, how much of the carefully laid out plans that the IAF has set out will actually translate into reality? Rahul Gandhi was frothing at the mouth over 36 Rafales. He will go into convulsions and fits (pure political theatre) if the IAF acquires another 36 Rafales.

So when we argue for greater squadron strength, please take into account the financial and political realities that exist in India. Please also note that these realities DO NOT exist in China. It is for this reason that China can build hundreds of J-10s, J-11s, J-15s, J-20s and J-31s. Who is the Chinese counterpart of Rahul Gandhi to say no? What the Xi the Panda says, is what will happen. Is that the reality in India?

There over 500 J-10s in service right now with the PLAAF. Why talk of mid-2030s, when it will be even worse for us. Right at this very moment, the PLAAF has a clear quantitative advantage. Then why is the PLAAF not attacking? The IAF cannot match that number. Ask the PLAAF to bring all 500 of them (and the other types - also in hundreds - to battle). We are staring at defeat onlee. Is that not the point of the quantitative swarm? What really is stopping the PLAAF from doing this? The Panda would live to teach us evil Yindoos a lesson. Why the hesitation?

But what the Air Chief said on 08 Sept 2021 - with regards to niche technologies - is where the next opportunity lies. If the IAF gets to 36, 38 or even 42 manned combat squadrons in this decade or by the next...thank the Almighty and do a lungi dance. But unmanned combat units will be the next thing. I honestly do not expect the IAF to reach 42 manned combat squadrons, anytime in the near future. But the IAF can certainly exceed the 42 number, but it will not be all manned. And unmanned combat units is just ONE among many niche technologies that the IAF is looking at.

Within this decade itself, the IAF will start reorienting to this one niche technology among others. There were always be manned combat units, that will not change. But exceeding 42 manned units will not happen. The political and financial realities state otherwise. And the IAF knows this. Just because they are politically silent, does not mean that they are dumb or stupid. They know 42 itself is unobtanium. But niche technologies like this is where the IAF is now going to focus on.

HAL's CATS Warrior With Group Captain Harsh Vardhan Thakur, VM (Retd)

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:The IAF must have a target number for Tejas MK2 that it would want to buy over the next 10-15 years. Likely some sort of AMCA numbers must also be featuring in its medium to long term force planning. At one point, it may have also included some number of Su-57/FGFA's in its post 2025, or post 2030 force-mix before the MOD withdrew from the program back in 2017/2018. All these are or were at one point programs that the IAF was (PAKFA) or still does (MK2, and AMCA) expect to get a return on (in terms of having them available at a near, medium, or long term). While it may not have explicitly spelled that out via the media or a press release/statement, it doesn't mean that it doesn't expect to or didn't expect to begin inducting some or all of these aircraft when they were made available.
The Air Chief has made a rough estimate of inducting 350 local birds. That includes the 83 Tejas Mk1A. That leaves a gap of 267 aircraft, but all will not be the Mk2 variant. But at minimum, 100+ aircraft for sure. Some estimates have said as high as 200.

Will AMCA come in the next 10 - 15 years? I am not that optimistic. Su-57 in its current form will not come. And the IAF is not interested - at present - of inducting any other fifth generation platform beyond the AMCA.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:
Will AMCA come in the next 10 - 15 years? I am not that optimistic. Su-57 in its current form will not come. And the IAF is not interested - at present - of inducting any other fifth generation platform beyond the AMCA.
Right. So as I said, the IAF does plan on inducting additional aircraft beyond just the Rafale and MK1A. These include mainly the MK2, and possibly the AMCA as soon as the IAF can get hands on it. MK2's may even come to the IAF before the end of the decade so is more medium term. Other things like more MiG-29's, and possibly additional new built Super Sukhois have also been mentioned here. The IAF/MOD at one point also had plans to buy the FGFA derivative of the PAKFA. This plan no longer exists but that doesn't mean that it wasn't part of the IAF's medium-long term planning years ago when the MOD was still part of that joint Indo-Russian program. My point is that the IAF has publicly discussed a squadron strength number (42 gets used in the media) but in private, it would surely have a range and capability mix that it feels it needs to get at within the next 10-20 years to be comfortable enough to deter China. To say that the IAF only plans on 36 Rafales and 80 odd MK1A's and that won't change even if China builds/inducts 400 additional aircraft (over anticipated levels) is not really a correct characterization of how the force mix discussion may evolve inside the IAF's planning process. AMCA and possibly getting back on FGFA would surely feature in that internal discussion when thinking about the 10-20 year horizon. That force mix, or range need not be publicly discussed and that internal number will likely evolve over time as PLAAF's capabilities (or lack of capability for that matter) become clearer and change over time.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by ldev »

Cain Marko wrote:What I gather from the discussion so far. IAF does not take the PLAAF 5 GEN threat too seriously. Yet.

When the PLAAF/PAF seriously starts to threaten with such platforms, I fully expect some emergency procurement, in case the AMCA is not available at said time.

What that emergency purchase will be is anybody's guess. I think that we'll see iaf accepting the inevitable around 2026-30 when the j20 types are coming in hot. Then it'll be a purchase of JSF, if available or the pakfa, which should have matured by then. Quantity? Minimum 36.
The IAF will look for emergency solutions when PLAAF J-20s with HARM missiles can come well within the S-400 typical detection range for 4th generation fighters. By then the IAF will have taken delivery of all the S-400 systems ordered. Right now PLAAF HARM missile development is branching off in two directions. One is their version of the KH-31P, the YJ-91 with an updated Chinese seeker. This has been seen on the J-16D which they are trying to develop as a dedicated SEAD platform. However this is a big missile and cannot be carried internally by the J-20. More worrying is the possible development of the PL-15 as an AGM HARM. It has the range and it has been sized so that 4 can be carried in the internal weapons bay of the J-20. In any future conflict the PLAAF will first deploy J-20s with PL-15 HARMs against India's S-400. That threat is not yet crystallized. But it will become a reality at some point in the future.
Looking at the northern neighbour, we have to have niche technologies which must be built in-house by our own industry for reasons of security,” the IAF chief said.
I would presume he is referring to FLIR/IRSTs capable of detecting LO aircraft such as the J-20 at greater distances vs fighter radars and these sensors to be developed locally and which can be installed on the IAF's existing 4th generation fighters.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Having a plan is one thing. Having the funds to execute that plan is a whole other story. No acquisition of numbers is going to exceed 42 manned combat squadrons. What they wish and desire for in private, has to translate into reality.

Crude Example - I wish to go on a date with Katrina Kaif (you probably may not know who that is...Bollywood actress...very pretty!). But Katrina Kaif (60 squadrons) has a boyfriend called Vicky Kaushal (MoD). But I (IAF) tell myself in private, that I will score a date with Katrina. When she sees me approach her, she will laugh and say "get away from me loser" and will then call Vicky Kaushaul to protect herself.

This is the reality that the IAF is living in and it is a reality that we on BRF need to get used to. Even the IAF knows it will not reach 42 this decade and the PLAAF will only continue to grow.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:Having a plan is one thing. Having the funds to execute that plan is a whole other story. No acquisition of numbers is going to exceed 42 manned combat squadrons. What they wish and desire for in private, has to translate into reality.

This is the reality that the IAF is living in and it is a reality that we on BRF need to get used to. Even the IAF knows it will not reach 42 this decade and the PLAAF will only continue to grow.
In military planning (in democracies where you have civilian and political control) you assess a particular force mix, and develop a range of capability that you need to have to meet national security objectives given a particular threat or in this case a series of threats from primarily Pakistan and China. As SME's, you do your analysis and provide the best possible expert advise on what that mix needs to look like tomorrow, 10 years from now, and more long term. It is important to highlight that privately, and sometimes publicly as the non SME's (the babus and the political class) need to understand that the delta b/w what you think is the MV number / force mix (think mix and not a squadron number) presents a risk that they have to mitigate or accept. This is why the IAF highlighting 42 squadrons (even though they may not get them) in the media is important. In private, I am sure they are presenting a much more nuanced force mix that includes a range of options instead of a rigid squadron number (42) that is shared publicly. Change the types in that growth list and you could end up with a number smaller than 42 (or larger for that matter).

This is no different from what other military forces do in democracies. The USAF has the similar aspirational goals described in a formal document that it updates each year for both the executive and legislative branches. I does this fully aware of the fact that it may not get there. And likely won't. But you have to do the analysis and present the risk that you have to accept (or do something about it) because as SME's you are entrusted with doing this sort of analysis on both your own force structure and that of your potential competitors. The IAF would be doing the same. Remember, a decade ago, it would have baked in receiving the FGFA by around the mid 2020s. Why did it think it needed these aircraft since now it can deal with China without them? Were they going for an overkill earlier or are they taking a risk now? It would have also baked in receiving more than a few dozen MMRCA's by now and perhaps all 100+ by 2025. That is also not happening. MK1A's are coming and looking forward the IAF would have already have a rough estimate of what number of MK2's it expects to get b/w 2030-2035 and when it can expect to get AMCA or when it needs to look to get back into FGFA and buy the SU-57 as an interim capability if AMCA takes longer. All of these would be within the range of options the IAF would be using for planning as things evolve.

As a point of discussion (in the forum) as opposed to merely presenting news, it is legitimate for many here to look at the PLAAF upcoming modernization (expected) and see if the IAF needs to adjust its acquisition. It is worth discussing. I for one think that the IAF needs to expand LCA MK1A and MK2 production so that both are being delivered concurrently at a combined rate of 40-60 aircraft a year at the very least. AMCA is a new system which requires inventing things that haven't existed with HAL or ADA yet. MK1A and MK2 don't require that. Manufacturing and production scaling is far easier than accelerating AMCA development. No one has been able to develop and operationalize a 5th gen fighter aircraft in under 15 years including the US and Russia so AMCA will takes its natural course. But MK1A and MK2 are levers that you can pull now with the hope to get a 2x or more increase in deliveries later this decade. There are also other things you can do like accelerating the SS upgrades, or buying a few new SS's that hash out all the things you need added as a retrofit on existing aircraft.
Rakesh wrote:I beg to differ. An article I read stated the PL-15 as exceeding the kinematic performance of the Meteor and AIM-120D and has the largest NEZ of around 150+ km. The missile you are referring to is the PL-21 with a range of 400+ km. The IAF will lose all her aircraft against the PL-15, including the Rafale. Nothing will survive. What is the IAF going to do with Meteor? :lol:
That's right based on my understanding. Based on a Janes presentation on Chinese weapons, the PL-15 is an 8 inch diameter missile with a two pulse SRM. Janes estimates a 30-40% range increase over the AIM-120D. But the CONOPS would be to use the PL-15 on the stealth jets that would allow them with a longer shot compared to the PL-12. The more niche longer ranged missiles (likely meant against high value targets but also as payloads carried by 4th gen aircraft supporting 5th gen aircraft from further back) are believed to be the PL-17 or 21 but neither of those are fielded. We still don't know how operational or how proliferated the PL-15 is but it was considered a high enough threat to the US Air Force for them to begin an AMRAAM replacement program in 2014/15.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Brar, I was being sarcastic about the PL-15 :lol:
brar_w wrote:In military planning (in democracies where you have civilian and political control) you assess a particular force mix....
None of this will work in India. It is a great concept, but will not work in India.
brar_w wrote:This is no different from what other military forces do in democracies. The USAF has the similar aspirational goals...
This concept works in western democracies, it does not work in India. Please do not equate what works in the US, will work in India. It will not.

The application of democracy has a different meaning in India than it does in the West. Pakistan is a also a democracy :)
brar_w wrote:As a point of discussion (in the forum) as opposed to merely presenting news, it is legitimate for many here to look at the PLAAF upcoming modernization (expected) and see if the IAF needs to adjust its acquisition. It is worth discussing.
The PLAAF quantitative modernization and upgradation is not even on the same level as the IAF one. Whatever adjustments the IAF needs to do, will not exceed the 42 manned squadron number. Tens of Hundreds of aircraft, whether local or phoren, is not going to happen in a rapid time frame. But envying the PLAAF modernization is indeed a discussion worth having :)
brar_w wrote:I for one think that the IAF needs to expand LCA MK1A and MK2 production so that both are being delivered concurrently at a combined rate of 40-60 aircraft a year at the very least.
Tejas Mk2 production will not overlap the Mk1A production, in the numbers you have stated. Not going to happen.
brar_w wrote:AMCA is a new system which requires inventing things that haven't existed with HAL or ADA yet. MK1A and MK2 don't require that. Manufacturing and production scaling is far easier than accelerating AMCA development. No one has been able to develop and operationalize a 5th gen fighter aircraft in under 15 years including the US and Russia so AMCA will takes its natural course. But MK1A and MK2 are levers that you can pull now with the hope to get a 2x or more increase in deliveries later this decade. There are also other things you can do like accelerating the SS upgrades, or buying a few new SS's that hash out all the things you need added as a retrofit on existing aircraft.
12 new Su-30MKIs are under negotiation to purchase, along with 21 MiG-29s. The SS upgrade has yet to take off, but it hope it does soon.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

"Not going to happen. Does not work here" is not reason for the IAF to stop its internal analysis, planning and presenting options to its civilian leadership. It will continue to do that just as it will continue on with mitigation strategies when it does not get resourced optimally or at levels it thinks are required to meet the challenges it anticipates. This is why they will keep bringing up the 42 squadrons publicly. Private discussions as I said will likely be even more nuanced and may include a range that extends beyond that. Long term planning, resourcing, and force mix projections (and threat assessments) is what professional forces do. It's up to their political and civilian masters to listen or ignore those requests. It's the same everywhere where the decision making rests in a civilian or democratic setup as opposed to autocratic regimes or military dictatorships.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Internal analysis, planning and presenting options are all part & parcel of running a professional air force. However, all the analysis, planning and options presented in the world, will not solve the funding problem. Like for the past 20 years, the IAF will continue to advise the political leadership about at least meeting 42 squadrons and it will continue to do so for the next 20 years.

And all along, the PLAAF will only continue to grow in numbers. No matter how nuanced private discussions are, it does not change the ground reality.
titash
BRFite
Posts: 606
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by titash »

But what are our realistic options?

The Indian economy and manufacturing MIC will not come close to China's for decades. Till then what's the plan to deal with a superpower in the backyard?

How does Pakistan keep India at bay? How did the Chinese keep the Russians at bay?

The answer is the same. Large conventional ground forces with nuclear weapons in the back pocket. And a willingness to use them at a stated threshold
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:IInternal analysis, planning and presenting options are all part & parcel of running a professional air force. However, all the analysis, planning and options presented in the world, will not solve the funding problem. Like for the past 20 years, the IAF will continue to advise the political leadership about at least meeting 42 squadrons and it will continue to do so for the next 20 years.
Or perhaps we will learn from past lessons and instead of rushing for last minute emergency purchases when the balloon goes up, we'd actually begin to listen to the force providers (planning and equipping side of IAF) and the actual combat forces (fighting squadrons) and begin resourcing them appropriately. Don't lose hope just yet. But at the very least we should (here in the forum) discuss what the near, medium and far term domestic production options are to mitigate some of the challenges instead of just repeating nothing more will be done or can be done.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:Or perhaps we will learn from past lessons and instead of rushing for last minute emergency purchases when the balloon goes up, we'd actually begin to listen to the force providers (planning and equipping side of IAF) and the actual combat forces (fighting squadrons) and begin resourcing them appropriately. Don't lose hope just yet. But at the very least we should (here in the forum) discuss what the near, medium and far term domestic production options are to mitigate some of the challenges.
That is some amazing optimism that you have.

Galwan happened last year and what is the emergency purchases we are doing? 21 MiG-29s and 12 Su-30MKIs.

Assume even if the deal for 114 MRFA is signed today, will that stop the quantitative advantage that the PLAAF has? No.

The last of the 83 Tejas Mk1A will arrive only by 2029. The Mk2 will have just taken off in terms of production, at that time. But neither will stop the quantitative advantage that the PLAAF has.

By the early 2030s, the Mk2 will start to replace the MiG-29s and the Mirage 2000s in service. So it will be largely a one-to-one replacement. Even that will not stop the quantitative advantage the PLAAF has.

We will ALWAYS be at a quantitative disadvantage vis-à-vis the PLAAF. Even increased production will not change that fact. Perhaps on the forum, we should explore other options than just doing a one-for-one match up? Are numbers the only way to counter the quantitative disadvantage that the IAF has? I doubt that. If the IAF can counter that quantitative disadvantage (via other means that just one-for-one and will be more cost effective), should that option not be explored by the service?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

titash wrote:The Indian economy and manufacturing MIC will not come close to China's for decades. Till then what's the plan to deal with a superpower in the backyard?
Nuanced discussions between IAF and the GOI will trump China's economy and manufacturing MIC advantage.

Our chai-biscoot sessions are world renowned. Ask Lockheed Martin and Boeing :lol:
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh wrote:We will ALWAYS be at a quantitative disadvantage vis-à-vis the PLAAF. Even increased production will not change that fact. Perhaps on the forum, we should explore other options than just doing a one-for-one match up?
Can you point to one instance where I ever said that the IAF should aim for a one-for-one numerical match with the PLAAF? Or a similar claim by the IAF (that they need numerical parity)? The IAF's publicly stated need leads them to about 42 squadrons. For now. Given how the development of the PLAAF progresses this number may well be adjusted up or down in the coming years once prior assumptions are updated and things become clearer.
Last edited by brar_w on 14 Sep 2021 23:49, edited 2 times in total.
williams
BRFite
Posts: 874
Joined: 21 Jun 2006 20:55

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by williams »

titash wrote:But what are our realistic options?

The Indian economy and manufacturing MIC will not come close to China's for decades. Till then what's the plan to deal with a superpower in the backyard?

How does Pakistan keep India at bay? How did the Chinese keep the Russians at bay?

The answer is the same. Large conventional ground forces with nuclear weapons in the back pocket. And a willingness to use them at a stated threshold
If we need to change anything from the current plan. It would probably be better to buy another 2 squadrons of Rafale and get rid of this MMRCA tamasha, invest a billion dollar (over 10 years) to revive Kaveri engine program and then focus on getting more private sector involvement in defence R&D and production. The current PSU rate of manufacturing will not do. We should seriously consider another Tejas assembly line managed by a private enterprise. We need a seperate defence production ministry with its own budget and someone like Nitin Gadkari or Piyush Goyal in the helm of affairs.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:
Rakesh wrote:We will ALWAYS be at a quantitative disadvantage vis-à-vis the PLAAF. Even increased production will not change that fact. Perhaps on the forum, we should explore other options than just doing a one-for-one match up?
Can you point to one instance where I ever said that the IAF should aim for a one-for-one numerical match with the PLAAF? Or a similar claim by the IAF (that they need numerical parity)? The IAF's public analysis leads them to about 42 squadrons. For now. Given how the development of the PLAAF progresses this number may well be adjusted up or down in the coming years.
Did I say anywhere in my sentence that you quoted, that you said it? I said it, so I will own it.

I do not believe the IAF needs to do a one for one match up. Right now, all I want is for the IAF to focus on achieving 42 and explore niche technologies, whatever they may be. Let us not put the cart before the horse. Let us invest our energies on what the IAF needs to focus on (achieving 42), rather than what is desirable. Once we hit 42, then we focus on desirables.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Agreed though it is possible that the IAF updates the 42 (likely increase) before it gets anywhere near that. The 42 squadron requirement dates back at least 12-13 years. There are legitimate ways to increase strength faster by boosting domestic production and capacity at HAL. Not sure if someone won't come in a position to do something about it who doesn't explore this option going forward.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by Rakesh »

Let us cross that bridge when the IAF addresses it publicly. Till then, the IAF's focus is on 42 - a requirement that been there for at least 20 years, if not more. We have all seen what happens when Service Chiefs says something, only for the Babu to put him in his place and remind him where on the totem pole of importance he stands.

And I whole heartedly agree with you on "....legitimate ways to increase strength faster by boosting domestic production and capacity at HAL...." if that brings the IAF closer to its goal of 42 manned combat squadrons.

Move earth and the powers that be to reach that number.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by kit »

China sends warships to Alaska
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chin ... -fckh6jh22
14 Sept 2021

China dispatched a task force of warships led by the pride of Beijing’s fleet to patrol waters off Alaska, escalating its rivalry with the United States for maritime dominance.

Two guided missile destroyers, believed to be Type 055 Nanchang and Type 052D Guiyang vessels, were joined by a surveillance ship and a resupply vessel in a fleet that sailed into the US exclusive economic zone off the Aleutian Island chain.

Responding to so-called freedom of navigation exercises by the US in the South China Sea last month, Xijin said: “Hopefully when Chinese warships pass through the Caribbean Sea or show up near Hawaii and Guam one day, the US will uphold the same standard of freedom of navigation. That day will come soon.”
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by kit »

Britain ‘asking for a beating’ over warship challenge in South China Sea, warns Beijing
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brit ... -3m05h722v
30 July 2021

Britain would be a “bitch . . . asking for a beating” if its aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth challenged China’s territorial claims in the disputed South China Sea, state media have declared.

The British flagship has arrived at the South China Sea, with plans to carry out legal freedom of navigation operations in international waters alongside US ships, as the UK bolsters its presence in East Asia to support regional allies in the face of China’s militarisation of the area and claims on territory.
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by YashG »

How much of this bravado will Chinese want to continue once chichi gets his third term. What a dramabaaz leader. China crossing the pacific will stretch plan budgets, keep their focus on navy, accelerate pentagons antagonistic actions. I love chi.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Chinese Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Post by LakshmanPST »

brar_w wrote: Others here can also do some research and post if they can find some accurate or rough numbers on historic production rates for J-10, J-16, and J-15.
Resharing my older post in Chinese ORBAT Thread FWIW--->
Strength of PLAAF which I collected and tabulated from scramble.nl is as follows:-
J7 (All variants):- 16 Brigades---> Total 400-500 jets
J10 (All variants):- 13 Brigades---> Total 312-400 jets
J11 (All variants):- 10 Brigades---> Total 250-300 jets
J16 (All variants):- 8 Brigades---> Total around 200 jets
J20:- 2 Brigades---> Around 60 jets
Su30 MKM:- 3 Brigades---> 73 jets
Su35:- 1 Brigade---> 24 jets
JH7:- 5 Brigades---> 120 jets
J8:- 4 Brigades---> Around 100 jets

Each Brigade has 24 to 30 jets depending on the no. of spares
Total:- 62 Combat Air Brigades ---> 1500 to 1800 jets

Few points to note:-
1) The above list does not include H6 Bomber Regiments/Brigades.
2) The above list also does not include Training, Transports and Factory Brigades/Regiments.
3) This is only data available in that website. Actual no. of planes will be much higher.
4) All J7s, J8s and early J11s will be retired by 2030-35... They will be replaced by J10, J16 or J20...
5) JH7 Brigades will also be replaced by J16 in future...
6) I saw lot of Chinese fanboys say that the annual production rate of fighter jets (for PLAAF and PLANAF) in China is 80 per year... We definitely do not know whether it is simply an exaggeration or under estimation...
But to replace 800 jets in PLAAF and a lot more jets in PLANAF by 2035, the production numbers should indeed by 80 per year...
7) Possible production rates (which I believe is true after lurking in 2-3 Chinese forums) exclusively for PLAAF are as follows:-
J10 - 24 per year
J16 - 24 per year
J20 - 12 per year
J11 is most likely not in production anymore. (The bar chart in the Japanese report which Brar shared actually confirms this)...
----
PLAAF need to replace 30 Air Brigades of J7 (17 Brig), J8 (4 Brig), JH-7 (5 Brig) & early J11s (4 Brig) by 2035. They will also retire the 3 Su30 Brigades by 2040.
Their current Production capacity is atleast 2.5 Brigades per year for PLAAF alone, which I believe will increase to 3 Brigades per year in coming days with increase in J20 production to 24 per year. I doubt they will increase the production rate of J16s beyond 24 for PLAAF.
That is why I believe that actual PLAAF fighter jet numbers won't increase significantly between now and 2035. However, the increase in capabilities will indeed be exponential.

Regarding J31... My guess is, once it enters production, it will help in raising additional Combat Air Brigades before it starts replacing earlier J10 models. And in all probability, J10 production will stop as soon as J31 enters mass production sometime in 2025-2030.
----
My assumption of future PLAAF by 2040:-
1) 'Light' J10 (~F16):- Total 20 Air Brigades
2) 'Heavy' Single seat Multirole J11 (~F15): Total 10 Air Brigades
3) 'Heavy' Twin seat Multirole J16 (~F15):- Total 20 Air Brigades
4) 'Light' 5th Gen J31 (~F35):- Total 10 Air Brigades
5) 'Heavy' 5th Gen J20 (~F22):- Total 10 Air Brigades
That will be 70 Combat Air Brigades.

I somehow refuse to believe that PLAAF will have 2500 Fighter Jets by 2040. May be PLAAF+PLANAF together may have that figure, but PLAAF alone won't reach 2500 Fighter Jets. We should also look at other factors, like absorption rate that is possible in PLAAF, training of additional pilots and ground crews to man so many Combat jets in such a short time etc.
----
To counter this, IAF will have
1) Tejas Mk1/1A:- 6 squadrons
2) Tejas Mk2:- 8 squadrons
3) Rafale:- 4 squadrons
4) AMCA:- 6 squadrons
5) Su30MKI:- 13 squadrons
That is 37 squadrons assuming Tejas Mk2 & AMCA go as per schedule. (I hope 5 more squadrons of Tejas Mk2, AMCA or Rafale are added somewhere in the mix to take it to 42 squadrons).

We also need to consider other factors like how many of those jets PLAAF can realistically deploy in Tibet in case of a war. I believe IAF can successfully defend a PLAAF attack and also carry out significant offensive operations just across the LAC/border in Tibet. I don't think IAF need to attack deep inside Chinese mainland.
May be that is why IAF Chiefs are quite confident about being able to stand up to PLAAF with 36-37 squadrons in case of a war.
Post Reply