Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

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
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Haridas »

Pratyush wrote:Don't believe that any one is available for sale.

Which is why my first post on this particular topic was for an indigenous design utilising 4 dry Kaveri engines and an un refueled combat range of 3000 kms and a payload of 9 tons.
Ingenious idea to make indigenous 4 dry Kaveri engine bomber to meet IAF need of Qty-500 (the economic breakpoint).

Ohh I hear IAF/MoD cant afford unobtanium cost of 114 MRFA.
Or did I hear money grows on tree to design-develop-produce Qty-12 to meet Indian need ?

Hilarious indeed.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Aditya_V »

A dedicated bomber will be useful against Pakis also, say after initial strikes by fighters , CM, BM temporarily incapacitating PAF , they launch a 100 Garthumas from 100km away at Sargodha, Murid, Shorkot road, another at Bhilai, Maripur Jacobabad. PAF would loose all capability very soon and then Oil storage depots at Karachi etc. Ince No PAF, OiL or Electricity with air dominance in a few hours. Pakis will be cooked loosing CandC, BM launchers.
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Haridas »

On the TU-160 performance note that the 12,000 km range is for subsonic cruise at ~0.9 Mach (which is same as cruise speed of Boing 747).

The 2,200 kmph speed is dash speed on afterburner, that cant be sustained for long and its fuel guzzling impact.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18267
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Free from CAATSA sanctions, India to Buy Tu-160 Bombers And Kinzhal Hypersonic Missiles from Russia
https://www.international-military.com/ ... o-buy.html
08 Aug 2022
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7807
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Anujan »

I am skeptical about the bombers. Given the pickle Russia has gotten itself into, unless it is another Gorky saga (the bombers are free, give us $1 billion to repair them), Russia will hesitate to part with their bombers.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18267
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Rakesh »

Anujan wrote:I am skeptical about the bombers. Given the pickle Russia has gotten itself into, unless it is another Gorky saga (the bombers are free, give us $1 billion to repair them), Russia will hesitate to part with their bombers.
I doubt we will get any strategic bombers from Russia. I believe a different play is happening here. The bomber is just a smoke screen.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by nachiket »

Unless Bharat Karnad and Baba Banaras are going to build these Tu-160's with their own hands this is not happening. The Russians do not have any Blackjacks to spare. And blowing billions of $$ on a small token order of new build Tu-160's would be worse than blowing them on the MRFA.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18267
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Rakesh »

nachiket wrote:Unless Bharat Karnad and Baba Banaras are going to build these Tu-160's with their own hands this is not happening. The Russians do not have any Blackjacks to spare. And blowing billions on a small token order of new build Tu-160's would be worse than blowing them on the MRFA.
:rotfl:

Nachiket, I am picturing the above scenario (wrt to Baba Banaras and Bharat Karnad) and I cannot stop laughing.

:rotfl:
RCase
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2249
Joined: 02 Sep 2011 22:50
Location: Awaiting the sabbath of Fry djinns

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by RCase »

Pardon my naivety...

A strategic bomber must be able to go deep into enemy territory and typically requires prior establishment of air superiority. We saw this with the USN controlling the skies from carrier based strike aircraft as well as stealth F22 (with air to air refuelling) in Iraq before the B2's and B 52s delivered their bombs. Recently the US did an exercise to fly B52s from the US to the SCS to join two Carrier Strike Groups - USS Nimitz and USS Ronald Reagan. The Nimitz and Ronald Reagan together probably field more aircraft than the Air Forces of a few countries. Even Cheen would be stretched to defend against these kinds of numbers.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... china-sea/

I would think before we do mental gymnastics about strategic bombers, we will need to significantly beef up the capabilities of the Navy and it's carriers. To counter China, strategic bombing will have to be in the heartland, which is thousands of km to the east. No point in strategic bombing of Xinjiang or Tibet regions of China. If we can't send our carrier groups to the SCS or have sufficient refuelling capabilities, it is a moot point to have strategic bombers.
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by V_Raman »

Well Su-30 is supposedly a bomb truck. Send few of them in and get out!
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1993
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by bala »

Several Su-30 MKI with UTTAM MK-2 AESA radar upgrade, can secure the area of say Tibet.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ks_sachin »

Are you proposing that the SU be employed as an AWACS?
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ShauryaT »

I do not think the alleged planned acquisition of TU-160 will be from the IAF capital budget. It will go in the strategic bucket on the same lines as the Agnis and SSBN/SLBM assets for the IA and IN respectively. The TU-160 will provide the IAF its strategic asset along with air launched assets in the SFC to complete the triad in a more complete manner and offer a credible force threat to Beijing by all arms of Indian forces.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Aditya_V »

I think this is propoganda, and kite flying. Russia is not exporting anything right now. It's just to muddy waters
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Pratyush »

Haridas wrote:
Ingenious idea to make indigenous 4 dry Kaveri engine bomber to meet IAF need of Qty-500 (the economic breakpoint).

Ohh I hear IAF/MoD cant afford unobtanium cost of 114 MRFA.
Or did I hear money grows on tree to design-develop-produce Qty-12 to meet Indian need ?

Hilarious indeed.
Sir Ji,

Please go easy on sarcasm.

1) How do you know, if a domestic design effort is made to meet this requirement. It will be capped at 12 aircrafts only.

2) how do you know that by 2035-40 timeframe, India will not be able afford this platform.

The answer is you don't. Nor do I.

My argument was made in the light of an absence of available strategic bombers in the market.

What little the Russians have will be for Russians only. Unless India is getting a work share in PAKDA.

PRC is not going to sell to India.

USA, oh please.
nits
BRFite
Posts: 1156
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by nits »

nachiket wrote:Unless Bharat Karnad and Baba Banaras are going to build these Tu-160's with their own hands this is not happening. The Russians do not have any Blackjacks to spare. And blowing billions of $$ on a small token order of new build Tu-160's would be worse than blowing them on the MRFA.
Arey Sir we are getting 1 Sq each of B1 Lancer and the B2 Spirit - andar ki khabar*

*pun intended - before i get bombed by fellow BRF's :)
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ks_sachin »

Pratyushji where is Kaveri?

ATM GTRE has not been able to validate all teat points and give to CEMILAC for certification for mating to a/c is it not.

Only in India we have grandoise thoughts of building a plane and achieving mastery without mastering propulsion.

So regardless of high funds mizziles and sexy radars and area ruling and canards and windtunnels etc the Gora sahib has us by the balls!!!!!
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Pratyush »

No big deal.

1) Wasn't Kaveri supposed to be certified by 2025. For the unmanned air vehicle.

2) if it doesn't pan out, no biggie. The GTRE foreign JV engine is always an option.
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Haridas »

Pratyush wrote: 1) How do you know, if a domestic design effort is made to meet this requirement. It will be capped at 12 aircrafts only.

Last I heard was idea of meeting SFC requirement by getting 4 to 6. Now if roos can spare more perhaps twice that i.e 12.

Clearly IAF has not made a case for it, it is fighting battle of MMRCA and AMCA, both much smaller than mighty SU30Mki.

Where is the requirement for which you proposed design-develop-produce indigineous new aircraft? Did I miss something?
2) how do you know that by 2035-40 timeframe, India will not be able afford this platform.
Again where is the requirement for LR bomber, and in qty that justify economies of scale to design new craft? Why put cart (means) before the horse (need)?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Pratyush »

Haridas,

1) Please re read my first post on this particular subject. Which was a speculation on what the aircraft could be along with when it could be realised.

2) At this moment in time, need for strategic bombers is just a comment by a retired ACM.

3) We don't know what is the thought process of the CCS.

4) Since when has the Indian defence establishment started carring about the cost and economics of any defence project?

So why are you arguing with me.
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Haridas »

^^
Its my time wasted in naive response to speculation only., and then other people built on it.
No wish to argue with you. Please ignore me.

Can some one tell me how to use BRF to use "ignore: feature"?

Or may be there is no use visiting BRF anyway for intelligent discussion.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ramana »

Raha knows his stuff.
He convinced NaMo about need for Rafales.
The planes should have had his initials not RBS test pilot.

He only one who had the detergent role to heart.

So his recommendation looks like it was considered.

Think about this. Bombers are part of Triad yet the great IAF chiefs want short legged aircraft.
Both IN and IA are part of Strat command.

I don't understand shiv and others.
PMO has decided need strategic bombers. It's not for discussion.
Why do they want roles and missions?
World is changing.
Just because you have YouTube following doesn't mean you are an expert.
BTW karnad since 1985 has taught generations of command officers in all services.

I think he knows more than us.

.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ramana »

Also after ACM S. K. Mehra IAF chiefs lost their MOJO. All wanted a safe acquisition under belt and retire to green pastures.
Worst was Tyagi who is part of Augusta helicopter scam.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Aditya_V »

ramana wrote:Also after ACM S. K. Mehra IAF chiefs lost their MOJO. All wanted a safe acquisition under belt and retire to green pastures.
Worst was Tyagi who is part of Augusta helicopter scam.
Sir I see these as Blanket statements, ACM Dhanoa and ACM Bhanduria did very well and took a lot of risks.

It's tough dealing with an ecosystem which will use every tool including family weakness, welfare, well being to get thier agenda implemented.
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3512
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Rony »

Rakesh wrote:
Anujan wrote:I am skeptical about the bombers. Given the pickle Russia has gotten itself into, unless it is another Gorky saga (the bombers are free, give us $1 billion to repair them), Russia will hesitate to part with their bombers.
I doubt we will get any strategic bombers from Russia. I believe a different play is happening here. The bomber is just a smoke screen.
Can you explain what do you mean by that :roll:
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ShauryaT »

ramana wrote:
He only one who had the detergent role to heart.

So his recommendation looks like it was considered.
.
Responsibility thrust for 2.5 yrs as COSC would mould a person? There is NO other asset (maybe except for 9M730 Burevestnik - the Russian "always flying" nuclear powered CM) as powerful for nuclear signaling as a strategic bomber - and yet remain within thresholds.

Given where we are in our Arthic state of affairs against our primary adversary, it would be prudent to invest into strategic assets to buy time.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by nachiket »

ramana wrote: BTW karnad since 1985 has taught generations of command officers in all services.

I think he knows more than us.
.
I find that difficult to believe of the man who once publicly claimed that India aided the TTP. Perhaps it is better that he doesn't have any official position anymore and is not teaching any more officers.
But Islamabad has insisted that India’s role in Afghanistan be restricted and complained about the Indian support for the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) accused by Islamabad of terrorism in Pakistan. The RAW-TTP link was publicly revealed in April this year by its former commander, Ehsanullah Ehsan.

Mattis’ request that India moderate its support for TTP will put Delhi in a fix because TTP is useful as an Indian counterpart of the Hizbul Mujahideen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, and Jaish-e-Mohammad deployed by the Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in Jammu & Kashmir. Severing relations with TTP will mean India surrendering an active card in Pakistan and a role in Afghanistan as TTP additionally provides access to certain Afghan Taliban factions.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis ... hE2WN.html


And then there was this ludicrous article:

https://bharatkarnad.com/2021/06/24/an- ... ing-water/
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ldev »

The question that nobody is asking is what will India do with a TU-160? What is the primary use of the TU-160 for Russia? It's primary mission is as a long range cruise missile carrier to launch cruise missiles targeting the US over the North Pole while staying out of the range of NORAD's radar coverage. For that purpose it can carry a total of 12 KH-102 cruise missiles with a range of ~3000 km and a variable TN yield of 250-450 KT. The reason it cannot get any closer to the North American continent is not because it does not have the range but because it's rcs is so large and EW equipment is so dated/non existent that it will be easily shot down by AD if it gets any closer. So it is used primarily as a standoff missile carrier. India does not have any comparable long range air launched cruise missile. Nirbhay's progress is slow and in any event even the most optimistic range estimate is about 1500 km. China's stated and written target when it designed the J-20 was to enable it to have the range so as to reach the capitals of surrounding countries, Delhi being one of the capitals besides Hanoi, Taipei and Tokyo......this was not to use the J-20 to deliver nukes but as a show of force and intimidation so as to say, "Look we can reach your capital." How will a TU-160 enable the delivery of an Indian nuke to Beijing and Shanghai? If it has to rely on a gravity nuclear bomb it stands no chance of making it beyond the first 50 km into Tibet or if it wants to go to Shanghai via South East Asia, it stands no chance of making it beyond the South China Sea. If the purpose is to acquire the TU-160 as a "strategic weapon", how will it ever serve that purpose with the existing munitions that India has? Unless India wants to ask Russia for KH-101 and KH-102 missiles? And if the TU-160 is so badly sought, what does that say about the effectiveness of the other 2 legs of the nuke triad? And if one really wants to look at the power or the lack of power of deterrence, just look at today's explosions at a Russian airforce base in Crimea which probably destroyed 6-8 SU-30s and 6-8 SU-24s on the ground. Russia regards Crimea as it's sovereign territory now and one would imagine that the country with ~5000 nuclear warheads would respond to such an act, but no such luck.
titash
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 26 Aug 2011 18:44

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by titash »

ldev wrote:The question that nobody is asking is what will India do with a TU-160? What is the primary use of the TU-160 for Russia? It's primary mission is as a long range cruise missile carrier to launch cruise missiles targeting the US over the North Pole while staying out of the range of NORAD's radar coverage. For that purpose it can carry a total of 12 KH-102 cruise missiles with a range of ~3000 km and a variable TN yield of 250-450 KT. The reason it cannot get any closer to the North American continent is not because it does not have the range but because it's rcs is so large and EW equipment is so dated/non existent that it will be easily shot down by AD if it gets any closer. So it is used primarily as a standoff missile carrier.
Rest assured if the Tu-160 comes, it won't be flying with empty bomb racks. The IAF is not that stupid. If the plane cannot be used in a survivable manner against its designated adversaries, it won't be procured.

But IF it is procured, it will come with a long range weapons system - either desi or russki.

In any case, the US maintains ~ 100 B-52s in service. These are older, and significantly less survivable than the Tu-160, but they're still in active use and being re-engined. Why? clearly there are roles aside from nuclear armageddon on day 1 of a conflict. Perhaps they exist simply to be used on day 30 of the conflict when enemy air defences are no longer functional
ldev wrote:India does not have any comparable long range air launched cruise missile. Nirbhay's progress is slow and in any event even the most optimistic range estimate is about 1500 km. China's stated and written target when it designed the J-20 was to enable it to have the range so as to reach the capitals of surrounding countries, Delhi being one of the capitals besides Hanoi, Taipei and Tokyo......this was not to use the J-20 to deliver nukes but as a show of force and intimidation so as to say, "Look we can reach your capital." How will a TU-160 enable the delivery of an Indian nuke to Beijing and Shanghai? If it has to rely on a gravity nuclear bomb it stands no chance of making it beyond the first 50 km into Tibet or if it wants to go to Shanghai via South East Asia, it stands no chance of making it beyond the South China Sea.
Why do I need to reach Beijing or Shanghai if I can reach Chongqing, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Chengdu with a short flight over Bangladesh and Burma with Su-30 escorts and heavy radar jamming?

Image
ldev wrote: If the purpose is to acquire the TU-160 as a "strategic weapon", how will it ever serve that purpose with the existing munitions that India has? Unless India wants to ask Russia for KH-101 and KH-102 missiles? And if the TU-160 is so badly sought, what does that say about the effectiveness of the other 2 legs of the nuke triad? And if one really wants to look at the power or the lack of power of deterrence, just look at today's explosions at a Russian airforce base in Crimea which probably destroyed 6-8 SU-30s and 6-8 SU-24s on the ground. Russia regards Crimea as it's sovereign territory now and one would imagine that the country with ~5000 nuclear warheads would respond to such an act, but no such luck.
What exactly is your point? Its a very disjointed paragraph
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ldev »

titash wrote: But IF it is procured, it will come with a long range weapons system - either desi or russki.

In any case, the US maintains ~ 100 B-52s in service. These are older, and significantly less survivable than the Tu-160, but they're still in active use and being re-engined. Why? clearly there are roles aside from nuclear armageddon on day 1 of a conflict. Perhaps they exist simply to be used on day 30 of the conflict when enemy air defences are no longer functional
B-52s are maintained for a lot of missions including serving as conventional cruise missile carriers and long range hypersonic missile carriers... for the global role that the US plays at....the B-52s no longer have a primary nuclear weapons delivery role AFAIK, that has been taken over by the B-2s and soon by the B-21s which will have the ability to penetrate modern IADS. As far as the 30 day campaign is concerned, do you really think that India can sustain a 30 day intense air campaign against China? That it has a munition stockpile to for an intense 30 day air campaign? So what conventional role will a maintenance heavy, supersized rcs TU-160 play in the IAF that the 270 SU-30s cannot?
titash wrote:Why do I need to reach Beijing or Shanghai if I can reach Chongqing, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Chengdu with a short flight over Bangladesh and Burma with Su-30 escorts and heavy radar jamming?
PESA vs AESA radar jamming to send a flight that deep into China? You mean on a one way mission right? I doubt that the IAF has any such suicide plans for it's pilots. The Russians themselves use the TU-160 only in a stand off capacity precisely because they know it's limitations in contested airspace. They don't send it over Ukraine. When they launched air strikes against Syria it was from over the Caspian Sea because Syrian airspace was contested. Ditto the US with regards to the B-52 which is great for bombing Afghanistan or Iraq but will never be brought within a 1000 km of China if hostilities break out between the US and China. And here you are talking about sending a TU-160 1000 km into China!!! Even the Russians won't do something that crazy or suicidal.
titash wrote:What exactly is your point? Its a very disjointed paragraph
My point is that the Agni 5 and the K-4 are far more effective deterrents already in place, with the reach to target Beijing. And the further point is that nuclear deterrence is not a bridge that any country crosses easily e.g. Russia unwillingness to role any nuclear dice inspite of an attack on what it calls its sovereign territory in Crimea.

Bottom line is that no matter what kind of escort the TU-160 is provided with, in contested airspace it has a very high probability of being shot down. It has a large rcs, probably comparable to the 100m^2 rcs of the B-52 and no intrinsic EW. It is no surprise that the US is retiring the B-1 which is roughly similar to the TU-160 and China is developing the H-20 and the US is developing the B-21. Russia has plans for the PAK-DA low obserable bomber, but lack of funding, and access to high tech components will likely make it a still born effort. So it is making a virtue of necessity and sticking around with the TU-160.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ramana »

People are disjointed with the decision and posting.
It's a Triad thing.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Pratyush »

ramana wrote:People are disjointed with the decision and posting.
It's a Triad thing.
Is the TU 160 a done deal?

Because a lot of confusion is coming from the strangeness of the current situation.

As all we have is a comment as a part of a lecture from a retired ACM calling for the procurement of strategic bombers.

There is a huge distance between procurement of bombers from the statement. We don't know or even understand if the distance has been traveled.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by ramana »

India needs a Triad.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Prem Kumar »

Ramana Ji: agreed, we do.

But is the Tu-160 the way to go about it? Wouldn't it make much more sense to build a B2'esque stealth heavy bomber? In fact, it would be simpler to design a stealth bomber than a stealth fighter. Less aerodynamic constraints, less need for maneuvarbility, supercruise etc. Designed with a large internal weapons bay to launch Nirbhays, Rudrams & Brahmos'es. The engine would likely be the constraint, but if we are willing to invest in a custom engine for AMCA-2, this is a problem that can also be solved.

A stealthy bomber can not only serve in a nuke-triad, but also kick down the doors in a purely conventional war. It can cause unacceptable level of damages even in a 2 week skirmish (thus deterring such skirmishes or give us long-term advantages by severely degrading an enemy's war-fighting ability)
basant
BRFite
Posts: 894
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by basant »

I fail to understand which places can they (planes) go and bomb. Not China, unless somewhere in Himalayas which are easier and safer to target with rocket force. Mainland is too far to go *and* to get back safely, even with stealth. Pakistan is overkill and in any case easier to reach by rocket force, or Sukhois. Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives? Afghanistan? IMHO, this is weird that we are not spending on what is critical shortfall but dreaming something for imports and grandiose. Reminds me of the days when VK Menon purchased aircraft carrier when our soldiers were practicing with lathis.

"Chavan was shocked to learn that some training centers (of the army) even lacked .303 Enfield rifles for training. Instead, the recruits were being trained with bamboo sticks or lathis. Consequently many units had become mere showpieces or as Krishan Menon derisively called them a 'parade ground army'."
-R.D. Pradhan, Debacle to Revival, p. 235
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by kit »

basant wrote:I fail to understand which places can they (planes) go and bomb. Not China, unless somewhere in Himalayas which are easier and safer to target with rocket force. Mainland is too far to go *and* to get back safely, even with stealth. Pakistan is overkill and in any case easier to reach by rocket force, or Sukhois. Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives? Afghanistan? IMHO, this is weird that we are not spending on what is critical shortfall but dreaming something for imports and grandiose. Reminds me of the days when VK Menon purchased aircraft carrier when our soldiers were practicing with lathis.

"Chavan was shocked to learn that some training centers (of the army) even lacked .303 Enfield rifles for training. Instead, the recruits were being trained with bamboo sticks or lathis. Consequently many units had become mere showpieces or as Krishan Menon derisively called them a 'parade ground army'."
-R.D. Pradhan, Debacle to Revival, p. 235
So what was the role of the INS Vikrant in the Indo Pak war ?..was that a bad decision. The problem as always is comparing apples to oranges.

Dedicated bombers come with an entirely different spectrum of capability. Properly used they are force multipliers by an order of magnitude. Looks like the blackjack by itself is an interim solution.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by kit »

Pratyush wrote:
ramana wrote:People are disjointed with the decision and posting.
It's a Triad thing.
Is the TU 160 a done deal?

There is a huge distance between procurement of bombers from the statement. We don't know or even understand if the distance has been traveled.
It does look like the plans had moved forward further. The ACM has not been making random comments.
James
BRFite
Posts: 105
Joined: 13 Sep 2009 16:48

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by James »

basant wrote:I fail to understand which places can they (planes) go and bomb. Not China, unless somewhere in Himalayas which are easier and safer to target with rocket force. Mainland is too far to go *and* to get back safely, even with stealth.
Maybe launch from India and recover to Japan? Like the Dolittle raid of WWII, which struck Japan and recovered to China. Well, one can at least dream.
Larry Walker
BRFite
Posts: 488
Joined: 26 Nov 2019 17:33

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by Larry Walker »

Dreaming is ok - hallucinating is not.
bharathp
BRFite
Posts: 453
Joined: 24 Jul 2017 03:44

Re: Indian Air Force News & Discussion - 23 March 2021

Post by bharathp »

complete noob pooch
cant the ghatak be taken forward? we have the base design - think of it like Mk0
we can iterate to Mk1 and then Mk2 in next 15-20 years?
that should/could be our strategic bomber?
Post Reply