it was thought of , never practiced or put into action.manoj_niketa wrote:Something very interesting thing i ever heard from Aviator Anil Chopra about 1971 attack on USS Enterprise
https://twitter.com/Chopsyturvey/status ... 3774339072
Sir, i think you should see the tweeted image again. It includes a very intriguing word 'enroute'Khalsa wrote:it was thought of , never practiced or put into action.
The Big E was entering a war zone. There was a ruskie sub reportedly closeby and shadowing her, probably the ruskies making a not too fine but a very obvious point.nam wrote:It was not the Soviet who slowed down Enterprise. It was the USN themselves.
They were not interested to get in to any fight and the USN admirals deliberately delayed the movement towards BoB.
IAF would have made preparation for any contigency. So not surprised sqd would have been be asked to work out the details.
ANd how would the Tornados compare to the MiG 27s which we had in our fleetKaran M wrote:Single role aircraft.
From memory, so could be way off here.esommuk wrote:RAF Tornado GR4 fighter jets retiring after glorious service. They have evolved over the last 4 decades. I wonder why IAF never considered Tornado jets. Magnificent machine for ground attack!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sF7NaTEIQo
Karan M wrote:If IAF had gone up against big E, chances are they might have pulled off a surprise. As recent as 2004, Khan folks came in underestimating our guys.
It would be a one way trip in all likelihood but I'd still put my coin on the Indian side showing a nasty surprise.chetak wrote:Not easy to hit a carrier at sea, especially one in a combat zone and that too using shore based aircraft.
There would have been major issues in 1971 in locating, tracking and neutralizing unless it was a kamikaze and not expected to return, in which case the chances would have been only very, very marginally higher.
I dont think the Indian military is much of a sucker for praise of any kind. Nor is there much info that has ever emerged from any joint exercise with the Americans etc, in fact one has to look very very hard, unless as is often the norm, we surprise them with the sophistication of our tactics or equipment & hence there is a submission to some Congressional panel, US Mag etc. Much to do with their internal requirements, rarely with ours. The whole Cope India newsleak for instance was all about the aggrieved fighter pilots setting the record straight to the rest of the AF/establishment about what they faced and why they lost, and not as much about praising the IAF to extract more info.Exercises are very different from operations. Neither side will expose anything much in an exercise and most of the praise is psyops in the hope of drawing out the opposing party into revealing something more than what was actually shown.
Indians are known suckers for gora praise and often become garrulous when the tongue is suitably lubricated. Maybe a few centuries of colonization and being under the gora boot will do that.
of all the schitt that the amerikis will tell you, especially after "joint" exercises, believe only 10%.
Even less, if one is really smart.
Any smart professional force will be very circumspect in revealing its true operational capabilities, especially to a bunch of yahoos who are tight with the pakis like the US military obviously is.
Not necessarily. I am well aware of the detailed SOPs that are drawn up & both sides agree to some level of information sharing. Exercises vary from country to country and we have really shared a lot of our capabilities and vice versa (though of course some stuff is kept under wraps).Only brochure printed and glossy paper headline features and headline numbers will be on display from both sides and not a damn thing beyond that.
Its not a question of trust or otherwise, more like trust but verify & have SOPs in place about what can and cannot be shared. Our growing technological competence has also meant that we no longer have to depend purely on foreign OEMs to come up with software fixes for some of our simulated gear as well.our combat personnel don't trust gora military and vice versa and everybody is walking on eggshells.
what do you think happens when we do military exercises with the hans??
Our guys probably carry mithai boxes and shove a mithai every time into any cheeni mouth that opens.
There is no concept of kamikaze here.AdityaM wrote:Comments on Twitter post suggested 40 pilots volunteered for Kamikaze
I dont think insurance or even family even come into the picture here. Did the CO of the Khukhri not go down with his ship? At Kargil, so many soldiers launched do or die attacks with little to no expectation of survival against overwhelming odds. Again paltan/regiment/fauj/desh ki izzat & orders, were what mattered. Did Nirmaljit Singh Sekhon care about his chances when taking on those Sabres?chetak wrote:There is no concept of kamikaze here.AdityaM wrote:Comments on Twitter post suggested 40 pilots volunteered for Kamikaze
who would have approved and how??
and ultimately, would insurance have paid out??
wonder what their wives would have said about that??
2x MiG-27 ML upgraded squadrons and I wont be surprised if some 23BN 2x seaters are also around for conversion training.Singha wrote:do we still have any Mig27 left?
the sqdn in hashimara has been scrapped and 22 derelict airframes are lying in the open.
base is waiting for rafale.
I have participated in many and no one opens their mouth, irrespective of what "agreements" have been signed. Everyone smiles, claps, shake hands and then quietly head home after the debrief and only a very few are allowed to speak.Karan M wrote:It would be a one way trip in all likelihood but I'd still put my coin on the Indian side showing a nasty surprise.chetak wrote:Not easy to hit a carrier at sea, especially one in a combat zone and that too using shore based aircraft.
There would have been major issues in 1971 in locating, tracking and neutralizing unless it was a kamikaze and not expected to return, in which case the chances would have been only very, very marginally higher.
I dont think the Indian military is much of a sucker for praise of any kind. Nor is there much info that has ever emerged from any joint exercise with the Americans etc, unless as is often the norm, we surprise them with the sophistication of our tactics or equipment & hence there is a submission to some Congressional panel etc. Much to do with their internal requirements, rarely with ours.Exercises are very different from operations. Neither side will expose anything much in an exercise and most of the praise is psyops in the hope of drawing out the opposing party into revealing something more than what was actually shown.
Indians are known suckers for gora praise and often become garrulous when the tongue is suitably lubricated. Maybe a few centuries of colonization and being under the gora boot will do that.
of all the schitt that the amerikis will tell you, especially after "joint" exercises, believe only 10%.
Even less, if one is really smart.
Any smart professional force will be very circumspect in revealing its true operational capabilities, especially to a bunch of yahoos who are tight with the pakis like the US military obviously is.
Not necessarily. I am well aware of the detailed SOPs that are drawn up & both sides agree to some level of information sharing.Only brochure printed and glossy paper headline features and headline numbers will be on display from both sides and not a damn thing beyond that.
Its not a question of trust or otherwise, more like trust but verify & have SOPs in place about what can and cannot be shared. Our growing technological competence has also meant that we no longer have to depend purely on foreign OEMs to come up with software fixes for some of our simulated gear as well.our combat personnel don't trust gora military and vice versa and everybody is walking on eggshells.
what do you think happens when we do military exercises with the hans??
Our guys probably carry mithai boxes and shove a mithai every time into any cheeni mouth that opens.
But in any exercise, whether we like it or not, to get maximal training value, a lot of our competence & equipment capability does get revealed. And we have to live with that. Because what we get in terms of Dissimilar Combat Training is equally invaluable.
I don't think that you have understood the kamikaze concept. It is not a spur of the moment thing as you seem to imagine.Karan M wrote:I dont think insurance or even family even come into the picture here. Did the CO of the Khukhri not go down with his ship? At Kargil, so many soldiers launched do or die attacks with little to no expectation of survival against overwhelming odds. Again paltan/regiment/fauj/desh ki izzat & orders, were what mattered. Did Nirmaljit Singh Sekhon care about his chances when taking on those Sabres?chetak wrote:
There is no concept of kamikaze here.
who would have approved and how??
and ultimately, would insurance have paid out??
wonder what their wives would have said about that??
In such a milieu, and ethos, of course each of these guys would have wanted to come back (so not a true Kamikaze run) but not surprised at all that our guys would have stood up no matter the odds.
I disagree, especially about the last part because I know for a fact that very few of these exercises are "under duress". In fact your entire account makes it seem that we are forced into these events by malevolent entities and we are not competent (gora worship, loose lips) to manage our affairs or even run our own ship tightly. On the contrary, many of these exercises were pushed for by senior leadership in our services, and took advantage of the available opportunities, as they saw the advantages they would bring in terms of benchmarking our own capabilities, figure out what we are lacking in & how to improve. It was give & take, facilitated by the MEA who used it for projecting our image internationally as a side benefit.chetak wrote:I have participated in many and no one opens their mouth, irrespective of what "agreements" have been signed. Everyone smiles, claps, shake hands and then quietly head home after the debrief and only a very few are allowed to speak.
The place is swarming with intelligence types from both sides, watching like hawks, anyway.
Agreements are hopeful documents and just to maintain cordial relations, signed under duress from our govt under serious pressure from the other govt.
Its not a question of trust or friendship or anything of the sort but somethings which are far more prosaic.remember the kilo story and how much pressure we came under from them as well as our own bab(oo)n gangs slyly looking for visas and jobs??
don't bet coin on such fruitless endeavours.
I say again, no one will trust another military. we will never fight alongside them as allies because they will never cede command to us anywhere and under any circumstances and we will not be commanded by them.
Agree with the first but disagree with the second. Silence and playing dumb only works insofar you have everything and know everything. Even the US spends a huge amount of effort & coin in training with almost every other force across the world & learning from them, and incorporating the lessons. We have also picked up a huge amount of learning from our exercises with NATO & other AFs and have tweaked our capabilities accordingly. We need not share everything we have in our toybox either in these exercises, which is why there are all sorts of notional limits on weapons put, maneuvering limits, simulated benefit from countermeasures etc.we may just end up on opposite sides one day, and one never knows how the future will pan out. So keeping the powder dry is of vital importance.
silence and playing dumb beats any "agreement" or "SOP" or "training benefit".
You really can't find a counter to specific items in our inventory unless you own it, and in many cases what we own is unique to us. This is the reason why some of our aircraft only simulate specific capabilities & don't reveal the operational aspects.pilots and crews are smart enough to garner bits and pieces of savvy operational techniques and inspired use of systems and equipment capabilities without ever talking about it to the opposing side. once something exhibits even the smallest of patterns, it is easy for experienced hands to clearly discern it and decipher the use and find the counter.
The amerikis have already flown every aircraft in our inventory (or its very close cousin) somewhere or the other in the world.
It is increasingly rare that we use any Russian training methods or operational methodology in any of our exploitation. In fact we have had several cases wherein we have gone back to the Russians to train with them to figure out how they use the equipment we originally procured from them, because they inducted it decades after we did, and are now drawing up SOPs which we developed on our own. Always helps to understand what their procedures are.they are very keen to understand our exploitation techniques because it sometimes reveals russian training methods, russian operational methodology and the Indian build up on that.
Nor do we go there with any Gandhian principles in ours, at least not anymore. Its give and take and we are fully committed to taking our advantages as well.they certainly don't come here with gandhian principles on their minds.
Good summary & will probably be the most cited reference for the state of IAF missile armory for the next few years.ramana wrote:By Mihir Shah
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/03 ... senal.html
Transformation in IAF missile armory.