MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions

What is your favorite for MMRCA 2.0 ?

  • JSF F-35 Blk 4

    Votes: 28 12.7%
  • Rafale F4

    Votes: 171 77.7%
  • Eurofighter Typhoon T3

    Votes: 3 1.4%
  • Gripen E/F

    Votes: 6 2.7%
  • F-16 B70

    Votes: 1 0.5%
  • SH F-18

    Votes: 11 5.0%
  • F-15EX

    Votes: 6 2.7%

  • Total voters
    220

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,516
11,307
India
If you think the Americans act alone first and then invite the others, you haven't watched how they do things.

Mass is capability.

Spoken like someone who's never heard about saturation.

Mass is not capability. You have gone back to the Soviet era instead. If you throw mass at the Russians or Chinese, you're dead. A single regiment of long range SAMs can take out an entire squadron and all the munitions fired at it.

For NGAD, the USN has decided to hand over penetration missions to the USAF due to the increased sophistication of modern ADS.

While the USAF continues to place great emphasis on low observability to penetrate enemy airspace, the US Navy will not need its F/A-XX to penetrate enemy airspace and instead plans to use standoff precision-guided missiles (PGM) for deep-penetration missions or it will hand such missions over to the USAF.

NATO is incapable of using saturation attacks on Russian and Chinese airspace. The US has an impressive arsenal of 60 Patriot batteries. However the Russian AF alone has 100-120 batteries of the S-400. Then there's the S-300, S-350 and Buk, even the new S-500. And then there are the SAMs with the ground forces.

Something Western observers don't notice or simply ignore is the size of their missile arsenals. Take the S-400 for example. With an offsets deal, India was supposed to build 6000 missiles for 5 regiments of S-400s. We later decided to import to reduce costs. But if we want 6000 for just 20 batteries (the numbers make sense, the IA bought 12 Akash batteries with 2000 missiles), then their 6 times bigger arsenal will need 36000 missiles for the S-400 alone.

Similarly, people go around claiming their missile inventory is running low, but they don't understand the Russian arsenal goes into very high tens of thousands of CMs and SRBMs. They buy a few thousand of each type every year. Where else do you think their insanely high budget is going?

Fun fact: The US + allies lost 12500 aircraft in Vietnam. The North Vietnamese lost 160.

It would be funny if they applied this doctrine to their tanks.


But instead, they're throwing train after train of T-62s, T-72, and T-80s into Ukraine. They didn't go "if our 12 or so Armatas can't do it, then let's sue for peace right now".

Tank advancements are too slow and limited by LoS, so it can't be done. Aircraft upgrades are game-changing with each generation and aircraft can influence the 4th dimension. One helps taking and holding terrain, the other does not, so not the same.

Aircraft should be compared with ships and submarines, while tanks should be compared with infantry.

The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan was a pretty good example of effective use of air power.
 
Last edited:

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,876
4,684
Bangalore
A group of 4 jets are necessary within a range of 300Km, with 4 on the ground, 4 ready to fly and 4 in reserve. I divided the air space facing Pak into 7 zones. So we need 7x16 jets to protect our air space at any one time. That's 112 ASFs. Similarly we need 112 jets for the Chinese front. The numbers have been overestimated.

So, with 200 jets occupied in air defence, the remaining 350 jets can be used to attack the enemy.

Also, PAF has zero high end jets, whereas more than half of the IAF is high end. That's too much of a capability gap.

And all that's without even mentioning the IAF's new advanced IADS, which will free up a significant portion of the 200 jets.
Wrong. The airspace is too long. And various different functions will be needed to be done simultaneously during a conflict.

Further, an enemy formation can be of 20+ jets. With just 4, it will be 2019 again.

You will need enough numbers to do air superiority, SEAD/DEAD, Long Range Stand Off attacks and Air to Ground Support, all simultaneously.
Refuellers were of higher priority. Two attempts were made. But the govt chose to sign a strategic deal with America instead.
No deal has been signed. Please share a source saying IAF or MoD has signed for anything.

The closest thing to deal is ongoing negotiations for 01 A330 wet lease.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RISING SUN

RISING SUN

Senior member
Dec 3, 2017
14,402
6,409
Of course IAF squadrons are distributed to tackle both PAF and PLAAF threat whilst PAF squadrons are solely focused on attacking India.

But can't we muster 200 fighters to fight PAF? I think it's fully possible. In fact, I think in a full fledged war, we would achieve air dominance over Pakistan within a week.
Bade bade Sheikh chilli aaye aur chale gaye, hum air dominance wali kahani Nani se sunte rahe!😂
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,516
11,307
India
Wrong. The airspace is too long. And various different functions will be needed to be done simultaneously during a conflict.

Break it down into 7 segments, and put 4 jets in the air at each. During Balakot, we had 2 MKIs and 2 M2000s protecting the LoC. And we already knew an attack was coming, 'cause the other side was building up. And in my calculation, I put 8 jets along the LoC, even though the IAF only had 4, which is why I'm overestimating the need for jets.

It also shows how much confidence the IAF has in their jets, 'cause if one of them was shot down, then the lone MKI would have had to retreat. The fact that the PAF failed to break the IAF's formation resulted in their aborting the attack on the IAF HQs and had to attack secondary targets which all missed for whatever reason, very likely jamming from the Indian side, 'cause all missed.

For simplicity, just draw 300Km radius circles on a map, and you need 2 jets minimum in each of those circles for CAP. The entire Pak border needs 5 circles. 6 are necessary along the Chinese border. Then 1 each is necessary over Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai. So a total of 14 circles with 2-4 jets each.

Further, an enemy formation can be of 20+ jets. With just 4, it will be 2019 again.

4 are on standby to take off, 4 more are in reserve. And those 4 jets in the air have 16 BVR missiles. All you need is to break formation of the attackers and your work's done. By the time the enemy regroups, the 4 new jets will have joined the first 4 and the next 4 are being prepared.

You don't need to kill the enemy in this situation, all you need is to break formation. How? Shoot BVRs at optimum ranges, they will face it head-on or disengage. This is where range counts. Killing comes later. Meaning, none of the enemy jets necessarily have to die as long as they retreat. It will be a humongous waste of time if they fail, 'cause they then have to land their big fleet, go back to the briefing room and prepare a new plan where every minute counts.

You will need enough numbers to do air superiority, SEAD/DEAD, Long Range Stand Off attacks and Air to Ground Support, all simultaneously.

I told ya already, if 200 are engaged to protect the air space, then the rest can do everything else.

We basically need 300 jets for each enemy to do everything else simultaneously. But today, we gotta take out PAF first and then concentrate on PLAAF. In the meantime, those 100+ jets will perform air defence on the Chinese border. Gaganshakti proved that.

People forget that in 3-4 days the army would have run over most of the PAF air bases, or at least the army's SAM rings would be right over PAF bases long before then. PAF has just 1 day to do its business before the IAF achieves air supremacy by default. There's no question that the PAF is not a force capable of fighting toe to toe with the IAF.

No deal has been signed. Please share a source saying IAF or MoD has signed for anything.

The closest thing to deal is ongoing negotiations for 01 A330 wet lease.

I'm referring to how we cancelled the refueller contract twice and signed the Apache and Chinook contract with America instead. Abandoning Apache would have given us more refuellers. But I prefer what happened, 'cause the Americans and Europeans can make refuellers available during wartime.

The A330 lease will be supplemented by HAL and IAI's deal to convert B767s for refuelling.

HAL will buy 6 B767s and I believe they will deliver 5 of those to the IAF. They will apparently deliver the first one by 2026. R&D work was already completed by IAI.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Rajput Lion

A Person

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
1,319
1,279
A Place
If you throw mass at the Russians or Chinese, you're dead.
Only if your intel and your tactics suck.

The Ukrainians have been able to strike Russian targets and they don't have a tenth of the possibilities that NATO has for evading detection or saturating defenses. They don't have stealth aircraft, stealth cruise missiles, or things like loyal wingmen and MALD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RISING SUN

Rajput Lion

Member
Sep 23, 2022
218
93
India
Bade bade Sheikh chilli aaye aur chale gaye, hum air dominance wali kahani Nani se sunte rahe!😂
Ye Sheikh Chilli ka swapan nahi hai bade bhai par satya hai....during the next war IAF is going to decimate PAF. Just watch this space.
Break it down into 7 segments, and put 4 jets in the air at each. During Balakot, we had 2 MKIs and 2 M2000s protecting the LoC. And we already knew an attack was coming, 'cause the other side was building up. And in my calculation, I put 8 jets along the LoC, even though the IAF only had 4, which is why I'm overestimating the need for jets.

It also shows how much confidence the IAF has in their jets, 'cause if one of them was shot down, then the lone MKI would have had to retreat. The fact that the PAF failed to break the IAF's formation resulted in their aborting the attack on the IAF HQs and had to attack secondary targets which all missed for whatever reason, very likely jamming from the Indian side, 'cause all missed.

For simplicity, just draw 300Km radius circles on a map, and you need 2 jets minimum in each of those circles for CAP. The entire Pak border needs 5 circles. 6 are necessary along the Chinese border. Then 1 each is necessary over Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai. So a total of 14 circles with 2-4 jets each.



4 are on standby to take off, 4 more are in reserve. And those 4 jets in the air have 16 BVR missiles. All you need is to break formation of the attackers and your work's done. By the time the enemy regroups, the 4 new jets will have joined the first 4 and the next 4 are being prepared.

You don't need to kill the enemy in this situation, all you need is to break formation. How? Shoot BVRs at optimum ranges, they will face it head-on or disengage. This is where range counts. Killing comes later. Meaning, none of the enemy jets necessarily have to die as long as they retreat. It will be a humongous waste of time if they fail, 'cause they then have to land their big fleet, go back to the briefing room and prepare a new plan where every minute counts.



I told ya already, if 200 are engaged to protect the air space, then the rest can do everything else.

We basically need 300 jets for each enemy to do everything else simultaneously. But today, we gotta take out PAF first and then concentrate on PLAAF. In the meantime, those 100+ jets will perform air defence on the Chinese border. Gaganshakti proved that.

People forget that in 3-4 days the army would have run over most of the PAF air bases, or at least the army's SAM rings would be right over PAF bases long before then. PAF has just 1 day to do its business before the IAF achieves air supremacy by default. There's no question that the PAF is not a force capable of fighting toe to toe with the IAF.



I'm referring to how we cancelled the refueller contract twice and signed the Apache and Chinook contract with America instead. Abandoning Apache would have given us more refuellers. But I prefer what happened, 'cause the Americans and Europeans can make refuellers available during wartime.

The A330 lease will be supplemented by HAL and IAI's deal to convert B767s for refuelling.

HAL will buy 6 B767s and I believe they will deliver 5 of those to the IAF. They will apparently deliver the first one by 2026. R&D work was already completed by IAI.
This is an excellent post. Everything what I wanted to convey has been aptly stated by you👍

People are also underestimating Tejas. Now IAF has started to bring it in its combat orbit. With Derby ER, Python 5 and very low RCS, Tejas is as deadly a bird as it can get, especially in Indo-Pak war scenario. Against China we need more Rafales and MKI MLU.
 

Rajput Lion

Member
Sep 23, 2022
218
93
India
J-10 are probably changing the balance. Where JF-17 are a little bit light and not so effective, J-10 status is probably different (JF17 is not in the Chinese arsenal, maybe not without some good reasons).
Pak seems to order them on a fast track.
J-10 is the only PAF fighter I am slightly worried about. Its Delta-Canard low rcs frame combined with PL-15 is a deadly combo. Recently PAF conducted an exercise between F-16 and J-10C and J-10 tracked F-16 on its IRST and killed it totally radar silent. This passive shooting is a new addition to PAF's capabilities which they didn't possess earlier.

But I am sure our war planners and TACDE guys are looking for new ways to counter it. And currently at 14 its number is too low.
 

South block

Active member
Sep 22, 2018
182
143
India
J-10 is the only PAF fighter I am slightly worried about. Its Delta-Canard low rcs frame combined with PL-15 is a deadly combo. Recently PAF conducted an exercise between F-16 and J-10C and J-10 tracked F-16 on its IRST and killed it totally radar silent. This passive shooting is a new addition to PAF's capabilities which they didn't possess earlier.

But I am sure our war planners and TACDE guys are looking for new ways to counter it. And currently at 14 its number is too low.
It's a tin can
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,876
4,684
Bangalore
Break it down into 7 segments, and put 4 jets in the air at each. During Balakot, we had 2 MKIs and 2 M2000s protecting the LoC. And we already knew an attack was coming, 'cause the other side was building up. And in my calculation, I put 8 jets along the LoC, even though the IAF only had 4, which is why I'm overestimating the need for jets.

It also shows how much confidence the IAF has in their jets, 'cause if one of them was shot down, then the lone MKI would have had to retreat. The fact that the PAF failed to break the IAF's formation resulted in their aborting the attack on the IAF HQs and had to attack secondary targets which all missed for whatever reason, very likely jamming from the Indian side, 'cause all missed.

For simplicity, just draw 300Km radius circles on a map, and you need 2 jets minimum in each of those circles for CAP. The entire Pak border needs 5 circles. 6 are necessary along the Chinese border. Then 1 each is necessary over Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai. So a total of 14 circles with 2-4 jets each.



4 are on standby to take off, 4 more are in reserve. And those 4 jets in the air have 16 BVR missiles. All you need is to break formation of the attackers and your work's done. By the time the enemy regroups, the 4 new jets will have joined the first 4 and the next 4 are being prepared.

You don't need to kill the enemy in this situation, all you need is to break formation. How? Shoot BVRs at optimum ranges, they will face it head-on or disengage. This is where range counts. Killing comes later. Meaning, none of the enemy jets necessarily have to die as long as they retreat. It will be a humongous waste of time if they fail, 'cause they then have to land their big fleet, go back to the briefing room and prepare a new plan where every minute counts.



I told ya already, if 200 are engaged to protect the air space, then the rest can do everything else.

We basically need 300 jets for each enemy to do everything else simultaneously. But today, we gotta take out PAF first and then concentrate on PLAAF. In the meantime, those 100+ jets will perform air defence on the Chinese border. Gaganshakti proved that.

People forget that in 3-4 days the army would have run over most of the PAF air bases, or at least the army's SAM rings would be right over PAF bases long before then. PAF has just 1 day to do its business before the IAF achieves air supremacy by default. There's no question that the PAF is not a force capable of fighting toe to toe with the IAF.



I'm referring to how we cancelled the refueller contract twice and signed the Apache and Chinook contract with America instead. Abandoning Apache would have given us more refuellers. But I prefer what happened, 'cause the Americans and Europeans can make refuellers available during wartime.

The A330 lease will be supplemented by HAL and IAI's deal to convert B767s for refuelling.

HAL will buy 6 B767s and I believe they will deliver 5 of those to the IAF. They will apparently deliver the first one by 2026. R&D work was already completed by IAI.
1. How many aircrafts we had to send to bomb 1 terrorist madarsa in Balakot?

2. Was the 2 Su30MKI and 2 Mig21 strength ideal against the incoming Pak formation? If given a chance will IAF again maintai6the same level? Not more ?

These two are practical demonstrations which have actually happened.

You are just doing guesswork in your mind. Not real world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RISING SUN

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,516
11,307
India
Only if your intel and your tactics suck.

The Ukrainians have been able to strike Russian targets and they don't have a tenth of the possibilities that NATO has for evading detection or saturating defenses. They don't have stealth aircraft, stealth cruise missiles, or things like loyal wingmen and MALD.

Not everything can be protected, especially against nap of the earth tactics. And whatever Ukraine has managed to do has largely been optics. You can bet that what's supposed to be protected will be protected.

Plus the Russians are hiding their capabilities from NATO. Taking a few hits is worth the cost.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,516
11,307
India
1. How many aircrafts we had to send to bomb 1 terrorist madarsa in Balakot?

Multiple targets were hit at multiple places, not just Balakot. There were at least two other towns that were hit that we know of.

2. Was the 2 Su30MKI and 2 Mig21 strength ideal against the incoming Pak formation? If given a chance will IAF again maintai6the same level? Not more ?

The advantage with the MKI is it can arrive at station faster than the enemy because it's a high end jet. An MKI needs 10-12 minutes to cover 300Km. An F-16 needs 20 min. So, while the PAF fleet is building up, the IAF would already be in position to intercept. This is why supercruise is important.

These two are practical demonstrations which have actually happened.

You are just doing guesswork in your mind. Not real world.

This is how it works.

Look up the USAF's AEF, check how many assets are protected by just 1 ASF squadron.

Look at Russian carrier designs, they only need 16 ASFs to protect their entire CBG.

Look up the USAF's Gulf War orbat. They had only 96 F-15Cs against the entire Iraqi AF fleet of 400 ASFs.

12 Rafales can protect the airspace over Kashmir and Punjab along the Pak border on a 24/7 basis, alongside 12 MKIs. With 24 jets, it means 8 jets are in the air carrying 32 BVR missiles at any one time. Naturally, you can add 12 Mig-29s and 12 M2000s to the mix too, for another 32 missiles. And that fleet can double during an emergency. So we can have 96 aircraft flying at once carrying 128 BVR missiles, along with another equivalent fleet with 64-128 more missiles ready to fly, 'cause there's no rule saying a jet has to carry only 4 BVRs. With 192-256 BVRs, pretty much all of PAF's aircraft flying in the air at any one time can be engaged. And that's not counting multiple interceptors that can be scrambled with 2 BVR missiles each, like the Mig-21 or LCA. And remember, that's 96 jets at one time, with many more in reserve or being scrambled. The USAF had 96 in total over Iraq.

The capabilities we have are far too much for the PAF to handle. After the first day, it's basically gonna be a mop up. In 2 days or so, the IA would have taken over some forward air fields 50-60Km inside Pak, between Jhelum and Chenab, and the IAF would move an S-400 regiment there. Get one or two such sites 50Km inside Pakjab and the PAF is done. Air supremacy 101.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Rajput Lion

Rajput Lion

Member
Sep 23, 2022
218
93
India
Both Rafale and S-400 are indeed game-changing weapon system(s) for us. Hope Indian Gov. orders 2 squadrons of Rafale and another 5-7 squadrons of S-400 ASAP.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,516
11,307
India
Both Rafale and S-400 are indeed game-changing weapon system(s) for us. Hope Indian Gov. orders 2 squadrons of Rafale and another 5-7 squadrons of S-400 ASAP.

More Rafales are unlikely, MRFA all the way. Program start in 2023.

More S-400s are possible, although I'd much rather see S-500. Some claim the S-400 and S-500 don't perform the same role, I think they are mistaken, 'cause it looks like the S-500 is just using AESA versions of the S-400's radars, with the addition of a BMD radar for ICBMs.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Rajput Lion