What's new

Rise of PLAAF : Implications for India

sancho

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2009
13,011
27
10,560
Country
India
Location
Germany
Well,if our situation is seriously threatened by such a war..u know it will be end for all 3.Exchange of 300-400 nuke warheads between the combatants would permanently destroy the ecosystem of these areas.
That's the point, I even think China would demand that Pakistan stays out of this, to keep the war a small scale one. They would win far more, if they can cut of the east of India and hold it with conventional forces, than increasing it to an all out war, without any benefit.
 

AUSTERLITZ

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 10, 2008
6,030
175
10,143
Country
India
Location
India
Our main goal is economic development, and our main threats come from the Pacific.

Any war with India will threaten to derail our main objectives, and that would be a very big problem for us. That is why we cannot afford to be lax in any direction, nothing will stop our goal of becoming a developed country in the next 1-2 decades.
We too don't want to be forced into an anti-china coalition by us plodding with us on the frontlines unless absolutely forced to.Peace and economic development is our goals too.[ if only our politicians are competent and deliver:(]

That's the point, I even think China would demand that Pakistan stays out of this, to keep the war a small scale one. They would win far more, if they can cut of the east of India and hold it with conventional forces, than increasing it to an all out war, without any benefit.
They can't cut the east and hold it..its too deep and supply lines will be gone.Anyway any taking of till now non-disputed indian territory would lead to endless war till we get it back or things escalate to nuke conflict.And besides such a serious conflict would make us permanent enemy of china forever,with us joining usa-something they have wanting to use us for for quite sometime.Why would china do that-it would make it overstretched,it has much more to lose-both countries do..from permanent enmity.
 

sancho

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2009
13,011
27
10,560
Country
India
Location
Germany
They can't cut the east and hold it..its too deep and supply lines will be gone.Anyway any taking of till now non-disputed indian territory would lead to endless war till we get it back or things escalate to nuke conflict.And besides such a serious conflict would make us permanent enemy of china forever,with us joining usa-something they have wanting to use us for for quite sometime.Why would china do that-it would make it overstretched,it has much more to lose-both countries do..from permanent enmity.
Of course, I don't think they want a war with India too, but IF a war would happen, their aims might be different than many people believes (hitting or moving to Delhi), since their benefits would be far bigger by gaining control of the east.
 

Umair Nawaz

BANNED
Sep 10, 2012
13,101
-20
11,432
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
More than the PLAAF, the concern for India should be the fact that China has the largest inventory in the world of non-nuclear ballistic missiles. Added to our inventory of cruise missiles and rocket artillery (all with more than enough range to target Delhi which is only 300 km from the border)... it means a first strike using these thousands of missiles could overwhelm India's airfields to NE India, rendering their ground troops without air cover.

The next issue would be the border infrastructure, which currently is massively in China's favor. Allowing us to bring far greater concentrations of troops and equipment to any point along the LAC than India can.

India's advantage is that China is mostly focused on the Pacific. India could do what we did these past few decades, essentially keeping their heads down and avoiding grabbing attention. Then use the time to build up their economy to double-digit growth, as well as inducting greater numbers of domestic weapons platforms. And building up their military production capacity, so they can produce very large numbers of indigenous platforms if necessary.
in simple words indians r no match for the might of china. Nor really Chinese politicians perceive them a real threat. Thats why they r focused on pacific and r modernizing their armed forces for that threat mainly. The missiles u talk r for the naval and radar bases in pacific islands of US and Japan and their regional allies there.

In real essence too the chinese leaders r right too as Indians seriously even in history have been no real match for china both in military and economy.
 

sancho

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 5, 2009
13,011
27
10,560
Country
India
Location
Germany
in simple words indians r no match for the might of china. Nor really Chinese politicians perceive them a real threat. Thats why they r focused on pacific and r modernizing their armed forces for that threat mainly. The missiles u talk r for the naval and radar bases in pacific islands of US and Japan and their regional allies there.

In real essence too the chinese leaders r right too as Indians seriously even in history have been no real match for china both in military and economy.
Not really, the fact that they have started the beef up of defence capability towards Indias borders clearly shows that they consider India as a threat. But the bigger threat and the more important areas of China lies in the east, so it's logical that you put more effort in defending your high value assests and against a stronger enemy. That's also why PLAN hardly will play any important role against India, since their main role is defending Chinas coastal regions and the areas of interest in the east.
 
Last edited:

Umair Nawaz

BANNED
Sep 10, 2012
13,101
-20
11,432
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Not really, the fact that they have started the beef up of defence capability towards Indias borders clearly shows that they consider India as a threat. But the bigger threat and the more important areas of China lies in the east, so it's logical that you put more effort in defending your high value assests and a stronger enemy. That's also why PLAN hardly will play any important role against India, since their main role is defending Chinas coastal regions and the areas of interest in the east.
Well i wasnt talking abt PLAN. My focus was their 'inland forces' those missile forces, airforce and army. But yes u have a point abt infrastructure.
 

MilSpec

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 19, 2011
12,432
36
22,659
Country
India
Location
United States
@sancho . Doubtful to you maybe, to me its wishful thinking on your part.

We are not going to leave China alone in the battlefield. We are already practicing together for a two fron war against India. All 3 Shaheen series exercises were India centric.

We will join China against a war with India. It maybe our best chance to liberate Kashmir as well as seeking vengence for the brutality you have inflicted upon our peole there.
Interesting...
You will not leave china alone in the battlefield... Wonder if china would give you the same treatment.

What happened to peaceful resolution of kashmir, have you given up already? As far as defensive forces of India is concerned, we are more than capable of defending every inch of our territory...
 

GR!FF!N

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 11, 2012
8,706
-4
8,478
Country
India
Location
India
I want to contribute another view that gets ignored here...

1. India is much smaller than China.also,it is not a "Militaristic" regimes like China.traditionally,Communist Govts all over world has greater amount of arms and equipments than similar sized democracies.so,India doesn't need "Thousands of Jets" just because Communist CCP has so.

2. It doesn't take thousands of jets and other aircrafts to deter China.as we use the concept of "Feasibility",everything is possible in this world.USA can crush China whenever they want.but is it "Feasible"??Hell No.same goes for Indo-China.India only needs to have enough force just to make the "War" economically unfeasible for China.

3. India actually has enough number of jets.what we need is replacing our 3rd gen jets with similar number of 4th gen jets.may I remind you guys that its mostly 3rd gen jets what China have,and they have several thousands of jets in storage.but it barely matters as nobody is going to do "Kamikaze" by using those jets in an network centric warfare environment.

4. India has a strong Air Defence.its easy to project numbers on paper,but in reality,India is having an upperhand due to all the level of contingencies it took as a defender.we barely needs to pick a fight with China.but we'll make sure that we'll deliver punches with appropriate proportion if attacked.

5. any military misadventure in N-E will be eventually futile.the reason,its lack of connectivity.an army could only win against an well equipped defender in a mountain warfare when they'll have adequate fire support,seamless connectivity and relative ease of bringing forces and equipments.in Kargil War,Indian Army faced a lot of difficulty due to Pakistani shelling,even when we dominated those positions for half a century.now imagine venturing in an enemy land in similar condition against shelling which would probably be several times more than what Pakistan did(caused for Pakistan,it was an unofficial war).now also take note about formidable air support and enemy contingencies(Mines,IED,surprise attack).its not that easy like it looks.

there are dozens of that kind of problems that China will face.I'd completely ignore the missile factors.if they can target our airbases,we could also make their airbases ineffective.
 

GORKHALI

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 13, 2010
3,689
-9
5,239
@sancho . Doubtful to you maybe, to me its wishful thinking on your part.

We are not going to leave China alone in the battlefield. We are already practicing together for a two fron war against India. All 3 Shaheen series exercises were India centric.

We will join China against a war with India. It maybe our best chance to liberate Kashmir as well as seeking vengence for the brutality you have inflicted upon our peole there.
You think its so easy that you entered Battle zone between Indo-China,and Indian Strategic partners will watch on their TV.

1> Lets assume, you entered into battle ,then you will witness Israelis firing crystal maze across your western border while French and US will do the best, what they been known for, err ....giving source codes to bigger partner. While Japan and Vietnam will be keep Chinese busy in their own terms like aggressive air patrolling,heavy deployment of forces in border region etc etc.

2> Russia would be deciding factor for us,as they will supply most of their equipments from their own inventory to fight Chinese and on pakistan side, they will involve themselves directly to keep them out.Tajikistan anyone ?;)
 

timetravel

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 10, 2012
2,665
-1
1,606
Country
India
Location
India
Why keep fighting.

Better plan to colonize Mars together. :D

Exit polls predict big win for Modi, hope they are proved correct on Friday :)
 

Alfa-Fighter

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 3, 2012
2,535
-9
1,503
@sancho . Doubtful to you maybe, to me its wishful thinking on your part.

We are not going to leave China alone in the battlefield. We are already practicing together for a two fron war against India. All 3 Shaheen series exercises were India centric.

We will join China against a war with India. It maybe our best chance to liberate Kashmir as well as seeking vengence for the brutality you have inflicted upon our peole there.
Then you see the entire Russian Strategic bombers , Planes and thousand of Non-nuclear missile form land landing on Pak , and Russian navy will burn the PN and port cities like karachi ....In end PAK , will lose itself. ;)
 

axisofevil

SENIOR MEMBER
May 10, 2009
3,953
-14
1,893
we need to open our eyes ...

we have good line up of missiles being tested ...but missiles can't be answer to everything .

we face a great challenge in the form of China ....

Yup but we shoul increase our missile quantity. If one reads history, there have been instances where arrows(old world missiles) were created in such numbers, their use on the battlefield was described as blacking out the entire sky! China is applying that line of thought as it mass produces missiles. Its quality is great (supposedly) but its numbers will make sure any enemy will fell the impact.

Then you see the entire Russian Strategic bombers , Planes and thousand of Non-nuclear missile form land landing on Pak , and Russian navy will burn the PN and port cities like karachi ....In end PAK , will lose itself. ;)

Highly doubt it. Russia has changed its stance on many issues, our establishment knows that. While Russia has been and continues to be a big help, it can always stay out of the war for a number of reasons and simply give aid/supplies and words. That is the fear I have and see
 

axisofevil

SENIOR MEMBER
May 10, 2009
3,953
-14
1,893
I want to contribute another view that gets ignored here...

1. India is much smaller than China.also,it is not a "Militaristic" regimes like China.traditionally,Communist Govts all over world has greater amount of arms and equipments than similar sized democracies.so,India doesn't need "Thousands of Jets" just because Communist CCP has so.

2. It doesn't take thousands of jets and other aircrafts to deter China.as we use the concept of "Feasibility",everything is possible in this world.USA can crush China whenever they want.but is it "Feasible"??Hell No.same goes for Indo-China.India only needs to have enough force just to make the "War" economically unfeasible for China.

3. India actually has enough number of jets.what we need is replacing our 3rd gen jets with similar number of 4th gen jets.may I remind you guys that its mostly 3rd gen jets what China have,and they have several thousands of jets in storage.but it barely matters as nobody is going to do "Kamikaze" by using those jets in an network centric warfare environment.

4. India has a strong Air Defence.its easy to project numbers on paper,but in reality,India is having an upperhand due to all the level of contingencies it took as a defender.we barely needs to pick a fight with China.but we'll make sure that we'll deliver punches with appropriate proportion if attacked.

5. any military misadventure in N-E will be eventually futile.the reason,its lack of connectivity.an army could only win against an well equipped defender in a mountain warfare when they'll have adequate fire support,seamless connectivity and relative ease of bringing forces and equipments.in Kargil War,Indian Army faced a lot of difficulty due to Pakistani shelling,even when we dominated those positions for half a century.now imagine venturing in an enemy land in similar condition against shelling which would probably be several times more than what Pakistan did(caused for Pakistan,it was an unofficial war).now also take note about formidable air support and enemy contingencies(Mines,IED,surprise attack).its not that easy like it looks.

there are dozens of that kind of problems that China will face.I'd completely ignore the missile factors.if they can target our airbases,we could also make their airbases ineffective.


Interesting points but I would like to point out some differences in opinion.

India only needs to have enough force just to make the "War" economically unfeasible for China.

That economic feasiblitiy only applies to a few nations. In a war time scenario with a major objectives, economics will not be a deciding factor. Such nations will produce weapons, tally up casualties, continue the fight to obtain objectives. I can think of one nation specifically VIETNAM....but there are others such Iran in the Iran -Iraq war.



As for roads in the North East,

I can think of a way which Im sure China has expertise in. A road building unit and given how fast they can build and the advanced equipment to lay roads in their possession, i don;t see a problem of building roads as they advance.
 

Didact

FULL MEMBER
May 5, 2014
414
22
1,374
Country
India
Location
India
Interesting points but I would like to point out some differences in opinion.

India only needs to have enough force just to make the "War" economically unfeasible for China.

That economic feasiblitiy only applies to a few nations. In a war time scenario with a major objectives, economics will not be a deciding factor. Such nations will produce weapons, tally up casualties, continue the fight to obtain objectives. I can think of one nation specifically VIETNAM....but there are others such Iran in the Iran -Iraq war.



As for roads in the North East,

I can think of a way which Im sure China has expertise in. A road building unit and given how fast they can build and the advanced equipment to lay roads in their possession, i don;t see a problem of building roads as they advance.
fair enough, But as a resident of North East, I'll point out the difference between your opinion and mine. You're free to disagree if you like.

It is certainly true that all nations that go to war estimate and expect casualties. It's already factored into their battle plans and logistics plans. However, you can only predict such data to a degree of accuracy, and that too if the progress of the war is in line with your plans.

You can look up any war, any battle, any campaign from any period. The greater the delay/holdup, the greater the deviation from expected casualties and losses. This is partly the reason why superior equipped/trained armies aim at a rapid penetration/pincer/thrust campaigns, instead of slower general advances.

And in that respect, the terrain and topography of NE India is a quagmire, both metamorphic, and literal. The first echelon of the IA defenses stretches over the very difficult Himalayas. And unlike what many here might imagine, mountain warfare will focus on key passes and passages that allow logistics supply to the divisions of fighting troops. And as with any fight in confined space, the attacker loses the advantage of superior numbers.

Assuming PLA breaches the first echelon, they will come up against the second echelon, stretched along the vast flood plain of Brahmaputra.

The primary problem for the advancing PLA is that they will be an infantry heavy force will no armored support India on the other hand, has around 6 regiments of tanks (T-72) in NE, with an additional 6 regiments of T-90MS expected. Combined these come to around 2 armored divisions should the army command decide to commit them as a cluster. ( Over and above that, excellent rail networks should enable India to deploy entire divisions of armor on short notice.)

And need I remind you that infantry in plains without armored support tend to get slaughtered, bravery notwithstanding?

The next problem is that India controls the various flood gates to the Brahmaputra and its tributaries. In case of a breach in the defensive line, India will simply flood the area, an area denial/ scorched earth policy if you will. (There is a precedent for this. In 1965, India did indeed plan to release all the water in the dams in Kashmir to flood Pakistani Punjab plains, in case Pakistan breached Indian defenses around Achnoor.)

There are more problems, but am not in the mood to state them right now.
 

Indo-guy

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 14, 2013
4,820
2
5,375
Country
India
Location
Singapore
fair enough, But as a resident of North East, I'll point out the difference between your opinion and mine. You're free to disagree if you like.

It is certainly true that all nations that go to war estimate and expect casualties. It's already factored into their battle plans and logistics plans. However, you can only predict such data to a degree of accuracy, and that too if the progress of the war is in line with your plans.

You can look up any war, any battle, any campaign from any period. The greater the delay/holdup, the greater the deviation from expected casualties and losses. This is partly the reason why superior equipped/trained armies aim at a rapid penetration/pincer/thrust campaigns, instead of slower general advances.

And in that respect, the terrain and topography of NE India is a quagmire, both metamorphic, and literal. The first echelon of the IA defenses stretches over the very difficult Himalayas. And unlike what many here might imagine, mountain warfare will focus on key passes and passages that allow logistics supply to the divisions of fighting troops. And as with any fight in confined space, the attacker loses the advantage of superior numbers.

Assuming PLA breaches the first echelon, they will come up against the second echelon, stretched along the vast flood plain of Brahmaputra.

The primary problem for the advancing PLA is that they will be an infantry heavy force will no armored support India on the other hand, has around 6 regiments of tanks (T-72) in NE, with an additional 6 regiments of T-90MS expected. Combined these come to around 2 armored divisions should the army command decide to commit them as a cluster. ( Over and above that, excellent rail networks should enable India to deploy entire divisions of armor on short notice.)

And need I remind you that infantry in plains without armored support tend to get slaughtered, bravery notwithstanding?

The next problem is that India controls the various flood gates to the Brahmaputra and its tributaries. In case of a breach in the defensive line, India will simply flood the area, an area denial/ scorched earth policy if you will. (There is a precedent for this. In 1965, India did indeed plan to release all the water in the dams in Kashmir to flood Pakistani Punjab plains, in case Pakistan breached Indian defenses around Achnoor.)

There are more problems, but am not in the mood to state them right now.

This is valid if China intends to steam roll into North east ...what if it's intention is to only humiliate India by mauling it into border skirmishes without actual plan to annexe north east ?

what if China does not cross the first echeleon and come into the plains but just retreats back after thrashing India managing to limit the war and possible losses and getting away with vital political victory over India ?

India will lose a lot even if it does not lose its territory ..as happened in 1962 ....
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom