JCage wrote:And how many refuellers does the PRC have? And what happens when those refuellers are targeted, because thats exactly what the IAF will do. So how many Flankers can a handful of refuellers sustain?
What do you mean? All Flankers will need refuellers? How about the air fields in Tibet? Couldn't they support 272 Flankers? What's the rationale for your point for PRC not being able to support all Flankers?
So aircraft which havent even cleared basic operational hurdles will be sent into aircombat. If the PRC does such an excellent job, then what talk of professionalism?
What basic operational hurdles have they not crossed? Let us first fix a date 2010. Now answer this in that context.
I think its pretty clear as to who is talking hypotheticals here! So the PRC will have 400 Flankers by 2010 (a 35% jump in just two years whereas it has taken them a decade and a half to get to the remaining 65%), but we cant consider the IAFs acquisitions intended to take up the PRCs growing profile in the coming years. Why? And what if we start bringing in IAFs upgrades for its aircombat fleet, such as the Mirage 2000 and MiG-29.
There is no evidence of anywhere near 125 odd Flankers being added in the next 2-3 years- enough of this please.
125 Flankers in 3 years comes to 40 a year. Btw 180 Flankers in 7 years comes to 25 a year. Got it? The reality doesn't change by closing your eyes. What's the number you think PRC will have by 2010?
Here is what sinodefence says: "In recent years, the PLAAF began to field newer models of the Q-5 based on the technologies learned during the cancelled Q-5M and Q-5K modernisation projects in the 1980s. The PLA is seeking to replace the Q-5 but a successor has yet been found."
You are quoting some fanboy website as "proof"- you do realise that sinodefence is run by some kid from the UK, right? And what of the exact numbers of these "newer models" and what makes them "newer"? Wait, nobody knows. And how many Km can this obsolete MiG-19 derivative fly with a half decent warload? These details matter, and if you evaluate them, you'll realise that the A-5 is not what we are gonna be looking at.
This is basically JCage again ignoring the facts.
So A-5 are just as junk as Mig 21 are. Will IAF use Mig 21 in conflict? Damn well it will. The same goes for PRC. You might be right on Mig 27, I am still looking at in more detail.
Kindly understand what I said earlier. Does the A-5 even have the range to undertake strikes in theater and return ? It doesnt! Which is why its junk as far as we are concerned, it cant take off with any reasonable payload from Tibet, get to India do damage and return.
A-5 radius is 400 km at full load (2000kg). What kind of payload degradation do you see in Tibet?
Even the MiG-21 M/MFs are far better than this MiG-19 reworked. And FYI, calling the Bisons junk goes to show the depth of information that you havent looked at. These aircraft are both ARM and PGM capable, like the MiG-27 and have one of the best nav attack fits in the subcontinent including a radar able to undertake ground mapping for ground strikes.
Mig 21 are comparable to A-5. No they aren't better. Don't confuse A-5 with Mig 19. PRC had plenty of Mig 19 (J-6) all of which we aren't counting.
Well Indian point defence fighters count. What about Chinese point defence? Wouldn't IAF fly counter sorties over Tibet? Would they use Flankers for point defence there?
IAF fighters are capable of self escort, such as the Mirage 2000's and MKIs, of which we are adding a squadron year after year. And Tibet cant handle all the Flankers, point defence fighters, transports, choppers and logistics.
How many escorts can IAF provide vs PRC?
PRC Flankers 272+J-10 70 = 344
IAF Flankers 50 + Mig 29 50 + Mirage 2000 50 = 150
Ratio of modern fighters PRC/ IAF > 2
The radius of engagement with Mig 21 or J-7 is at max 300 km. The exact reason PRC has built 10 air fields in likely engagement area.
Sure, and how many of these airfields are actually built to handle fighters rather than being airfields? Should I start listing satellite airfields in India as well?
No don't list the satellite airfields in India because I know where they are. Just list PRC air fields which cannot handle fighters!
Why not? How many of these PRC airframes are capable of night ops? Will the PRC be able to intercept my Jaguars skimming on the deck, using Litening for targeting at night w/o SAMs?
Good point. But Flanker and J-10 are.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/fac ... erview.htm
China has constructed 14 major air bases on the Tibetan Plateau, and a score of tactical airstrips. These bases give the Chinese air force control of Tibet's air space, the forward edge of battle in the event of war with India, and the capability to fly sustained combat operations over India's north and strike all India's northern cities, including Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta. Chinese electronic intelligence atop the plateau also confers an important advantage of combat information and battle management in any, air war. The high altitude of the airfields in Tibet is frequently suggested as precluding effective PLAAF air operations against India. The PLAAF may be able to overcome this problem through aerial refuelling, with strike aircraft taking off from lower-altitude airfields further away, and refuelling over Tibet for strikes at airfields or other targets in northern India.
Oh lawd, FAS. Have you catalogued the airbases yourself or even seen if they exist? If you had, I'd be interested. But sites like FAS etc are so much junk. And other sites quote them, and then others..
Have you? What's your source? This is JCage ignoring facts.
According to FAS, India has S-300s in plenty and a functioning BMD system, its 1998 nuke tests were flops and Pakistan has a bigger inventory.
Not related. Fusion test of 1998 was actually a flop.
Like I said, BRF is more than copy paste. We were debating this years back itself, and frankly, just because FAS or Global security says it is so, doesnt make it so. Given their record of the red menace is coming, theres only a 50% chance of even half of the above being near the truth.
Not related. And what are your sources?
If there was a Google earth compendium of these AFB, it would be treated seriously, otherwise, its yet another bit from FAS..
Did you even check the list on FAS site? Or you just yapping without even reviewing the facts?
This concept of theater is busted. How many fighters will India hold back to deal with Bangladesh? PRC will hold back the same number for Taiwan. Taiwan poses no military threat to China. It isn't like PRC will be fighting war for next decade. It is at max a matter of weeks or months. This the same argument that Pakistanis use about India holding back its fighters to deal with China. No wonder they always lose.
Please do us all a favour and research some basics before posting. If you had any evidence that the PRC had actually made a huge investment in logistics and air to air refuelling (bar the handful of H-6s they have now) to move the entire Flanker fleet vs India *if need* be, your comments could be taken seriously.
Again useless comments. No argument. No data. What's your point?
As they stand now, they are scare mongering. Comparing ROC to Bangladesh to boot and coming up with a silly analogy to Pakistan (what is with you guys getting emotional about Pak and bringing it in?)- FYI India DOES earmark a portion of its fleet in reserve when it matters, in recent years with buddy buddy refuelling and increasing numbers of multirole aircraft, this is no longer as great a concern.
Second, ROC is the raison de etre for the PRCs build up. They are 10X more likely to go to war over that island than us. And comparisons to Bangladesh- heres an AF which was amongst the first in Asia to be BVR equipped and has its own aircraft industry and local fighters..and is literally a fortified island..but never mind..
Did you check the context in which PRC and ROC were compared? I said PRC will hold back the same number of fighters for ROC that India will hold back for Bangladesh? Btw I haven't counted Porkistan yet. There is a concept of theatre...but it works against India not in favor. We need to defend against Pakistan which has started four wars with India. How many wars did PRC and ROC fight? Zero.
They are reopening it because they realise their vast numbers of airframes (most of which are obsolete) still cant get the job done. The H-6K is going to be used as a missile launch platform. And thats because the basic aircraft is a dead duck as far as modern integrated warfare systems go.
Exactly. The line was reopened to replenish the H-6 air frames getting obsolete. Going by your logic all bombers are dead ducks.
As I said, your comments above are speculation. You have no evidence of it happening, and please dont give me that Wiki stuff of J-11 this, that as proof.
There is enough evidence of this. Ignore it at your peril.
PRC isn't making any claims. 400+100 is a reality. On what basis are you saying it is a "hyberbole"?
Of course it is hyperbole. First you claimed 400, then backtracked when pointed out only 250 odd Flankers were available to the PLAAF of different flavours (not even bringing in serviceability here of the older airframes) and now you are raising 125-150 odd new Flankers in three years time, which even the most rabid Chinese jingoist would demur from.
No you said 250 is a exaggeration by PRC. Now you agreeing to 272 number as of 2007 based on which site - sinodefence! Again lost of gas for no facts or reference. You said J-10 isn't ready. Then you agreed to 70 J-10 being inducted! You talk about serviceability for PRC, and what's the number of IAF?
I haven't done all that deep research about SAM coverage. But I current SAM coverage isn't all that great. Also China currently has much better SAM systems.
You *should* do some research. For starters read up on Sanjay Badri Maharajs article on the subject on BR itself- "Ballistic Missile Defences in South Asia".
And "current SAM coverage is not great"- uh, sure. What with the IA having umpteen Tunguska, SA-6 units, not to mention the IAFs Pechora and SA-8 units, even if assuming a low serviceability add upto a huge number in theater. Then there are the dozens of Flycatcher and Reporter cued guns. Neither of which is a trifling threat to low flying aircraft (if they try to avoid detection and fly low).
And it doesnt matter if PRC SAM coverage is great- its irrelevant, since I am not the one stating that the IAF will be bombing all over South China as you postulated about the PRC having a free run over India!
Again PRC has better SAM coverage. But walla they will not be in a position to bring some of that coverage to their war. Are they that dumb?
MOD thinks China can deploy 24 divisions in a few weeks.
And its taking corrective action to redress that.
What's the corrective action? How many divisions can you spare for PRC if Pakistan decides to play its part?
Well this might be correct. But it is just a small window we have to get our act together.
Why is it a small window? What makes tomorrow different than today, given India will be actually enhancing its airpower many times over?
If you just woke up from your slumber check out US military assesment to Congress. You will know why.
The question is at what rate. No new tube artillery acquisition in a decade. IAF has 33 squadrons against sanctioned strength of 45!
No tube arty acquisition, yes- but Pinaka acquisition- 5 regiments worth, with further orders for the next five year plan. Smerch acquisition- 4/5 regiments worth. BM-21s with new LRARs purchased - quite a substantial inventory to boot.Searcher acquisition- for SATA and Herons as well. LOROS, BFSR and sensors in the hundreds. 180 Soltam tube arty upgrades to 155mm guns.
Could you please check your facts? This is not even accounting for the fact that India plans to n/w all its arty in the coming years, which according to the IA should lead to a 10X increase in effectiveness over current.
Coming years...when?
Second, IAFs sanctioned strength is 39.5 combat squadrons. And in capability, the IAF is replacing earlier aircraft with far more capable ones.
Your statements dont even take into account the IAFs growing reliance and inventory of PGMs, both Russian and others, and its better EW systems and its ability to conduct both day and night strikes.
Check out the NDTV program with Bharat Rakshak on air force raising day. There is a senior officer of IAF talks about how safe they feel with what they got!
So we just need to trust PRC that it will not go for "puran vijay" on India. Is that it? Just trust PRC? Trust doesn't work. PRC one day will seize the opportunity.
Trust is different from jumping to conclusions that they'll attack us tomorrow.
Some amount of concern is essential. But you are taking it to the next level. India is seeking to plug its gaps with some effort, detailing them would be beyond this thread but its not like the IAF and India have slept off at the wheel.
After all that talk you admitted it. You didn't say even if we don't trust PRC it doesn't matter. You instead still basing it on good wishes of PRC
