The IAF instead of trying to buy the Apache and Chinook should have acquired Refuelers.
Refuellers were of higher priority. Two attempts were made. But the govt chose to sign a strategic deal with America instead.
The IAF instead of trying to buy the Apache and Chinook should have acquired Refuelers.
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.
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".
Wrong. The airspace is too long. And various different functions will be needed to be done simultaneously during a conflict.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.
No deal has been signed. Please share a source saying IAF or MoD has signed for anything.Refuellers were of higher priority. Two attempts were made. But the govt chose to sign a strategic deal with America instead.
Bade bade Sheikh chilli aaye aur chale gaye, hum air dominance wali kahani Nani se sunte rahe!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.
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.
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.
Only if your intel and your tactics suck.If you throw mass at the Russians or Chinese, you're dead.
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.Bade bade Sheikh chilli aaye aur chale gaye, hum air dominance wali kahani Nani se sunte rahe!
This is an excellent post. Everything what I wanted to convey has been aptly stated by youBreak 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.
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.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.
It's a tin canJ-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.
1. How many aircrafts we had to send to bomb 1 terrorist madarsa in Balakot?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.
Its better than Tejas. Chinese have build 500 units by now.It's a tin can
MMRCA-2 (licence assembly) and P75I will never happen in its currently intended format. Mark this.IAF is going to decimate PAF. Just watch this space.
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.
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.
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.
Reality of French offsets and ToT.
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.
Towards the end of 2021, some informed source told that some good news can be expected towards early 2022......now, that early 2022 has become 2023?? What started in year-2006 (?) resulted in mere 36 rafale till 2022 and now one more competition.
For sake of noobies like me:
a) If 36 rafale were enough, why did IAF / MOD put a tender for 126 aircraft in year-2006?
b) Is not S-400 / S-500 a defensive weapon? while rafale can be used in both defensive & offensive roles?
c) Is not S-400 / S-500 expensive to operate Vis-a-vis Rafale?
for @randomradio & other informed members - does all this make sense?