Ambala to station first squadron of MMRCA fighters

[chauvunist]

You don't have an effective answer for MKI yet and you wait for Rafale? Dream
on.

IAF is in no hurry for LCA like PAF is for JF-17. We already have the MKI. Most of
IAF's Mig-21s are the Bisons which have the powerful EL/L-8222 jammers and
BVR missiles - you maybe shocked to know that a mig-21 can shoot down your jf-17
from BVR range and then scoot, while jf-17 will have to wait until the opponents
comes into WVR before attacking them, but most possibly you'll be downed even
before the enemy comes into WVR. I don't think IAF needs MKI to take out jf-17.

Ask your fellow members here who are dying to see LCA in the air but you have to admit that LCA is a failed project.....

 

[kurup]

With AF , trainer and naval versions flying and logging 1000+ flight hours without even a crash , one must be blind to call it a failed project.

But it is understandable , you are a pakistani.

 

[peep]

Ask your fellow members here who are dying to see LCA in the air but you have to admit that LCA is a failed project.....

LCA is fail for us even if it has higher TWR than junk fighter-17. standards afterall !!

 

[Gessler]

Ask your fellow members here who are dying to see LCA in the air but you have to admit that LCA is a failed project.....

My fellow members don't run the IAF.

LCA is a delayed project.

 

[rahul_rao]

Ask your fellow members here who are dying to see LCA in the air but you have to admit that LCA is a failed project.....

baat kyo palat ta hai be??

 

[Gessler]

With AF , trainer and naval versions flying and logging 1000+ flight hours without even a crash , one must be blind to call it a failed project.

But it is understandable , you are a pakistani.

Flight hours were 1,800+ even by mid-2012. They are very close to 2,000 hrs now.

 

[gslv mk3]

There is only recorded event of that happening, but you are making it sound like it was a routine occurrence . It was only a show of force, it did not achieve anything tangible for the IAF.

Many more unrecorded events
Were you spying for ISI in IAF headquarters to say 'it did not achieve anything tangible for the IAF' ???

The same thing can be done today by an all weather spy sat like RISAT today

A good weapon no doubt but it has exceptionally high IR signature which makes it a magnet for a heat seeking missile. Any launch of the Brahmos will be detected by PAF over the horizon radars, after that i will leave it upto PAF's professionals on how they counter it. Its a cat and mouse game between India and Pakistan, if India can launch cruise missile strikes on Pakistan than so can Pakistan. Your General Staff is quite well aware of that and that is why their posture and actions speak for themselves instead of the empty chest chumping that you are advocating.

Your subsonic Raa'd ?Babur would be countered by this

Using what will you counter a supersonic Cruise missile????
You doesnt have ABMs for short range ballistic missiles which moves in a predicted trajectory

 

[Contrarian]

Looking at the balance of power right now, its quite clear that there is going to be destruction on both sides.

Undoubtedly. No one would ever question that IAF would not take severe losses. But even if you take a 1:1 loss ratio for the F-16's and JF-17's of PAF, the losses for IAF will not be significant enough to slow down operations. It would still work in IAF's favour.

PAF is a fast and agile force; within minutes PAF can launch sorties and fire cruise missiles, PGM's and long range precision guided glide bombs. Similarly, India can manage to do the same too. Even with all this modernization, IAF is equally vulnerable today as it was 40 years ago.

Today IAF vis-a-vis PAF enjoys a qualitative advantage and quantitative advantage unparallelled in Indo-Pak history.

If they were not, believe me their posture would have been a lot more different and very confrontational.

Posture of the armed forces -whether aggressive or not- is determined by the GoI.

The behaviour of Indian members is like...."Abi betey peda nahin houey aur rishtey ki fikar lag gaye".

I'm sure some decades earlier, no one thought the MiG-21 will still be flying with IAF, most of them should have been replaced with LCA .....but some twenty years later, the first LCA squadron is yet to be inducted.....so let's first wait and see when the first Rafael unit becomes operational. !!

Very true.

 

[Ticker]

Undoubtedly. No one would ever question that IAF would not take severe losses. But even if you take a 1:1 loss ratio for the F-16's and JF-17's of PAF, the losses for IAF will not be significant enough to slow down operations. It would still work in IAF's favour.

This is contingent upon the duration of the war effort, the type of operations and their duration, AD capabilities, and many other factors. And at the end of the day and beyond a certain stage of loss sustenance, the viability of PAF would also be linked with nuclear brinkmanship.

Surprisingly, when most of us discuss warfare between India and Pakistan, the nuclear factor is completely overlooked. Both countries are nuclear powers and war-fighting can not be segregated from the nuclear overhang, as the Indian call such environment. The advantages accrued by the IAF gets limited beyond a certain stage and this is a fact of the nuclear environment that exist today and would remain in future as well. This factor needs to be understood. Sunerjee, a remarkable General, who came much ahead of his time to command the Indian Army, said it long time ago, that the days of Indian Army T-72s crossing the Sukkur barrage are long gone. And nukes were not even tested then. Yet he had this remarkable vision to predict then, which is now a reality.

Majority of the people here do not seem comfortable discussing the nuclear brinkmanship issues. Probably because of the fact that such aspects are discussed above a certain level and people below that level people are only exposed to conventional war fighting techniques. Now this is my personal opinion and I may be wrong.

Today IAF vis-a-vis PAF enjoys a qualitative advantage and quantitative advantage unparallelled in Indo-Pak history.

IAF did have this advantage, but many years ago. At this time, such an advantage as you perceive, does not exist. And as the time passes, this advantage will not be rising beyond PAF's response capabilities.

Posture of the armed forces -whether aggressive or not- is determined by the GoI.

Very true.

 

[SamantK]

This is contingent upon the duration of the war effort, the type of operations and their duration, AD capabilities, and many other factors. And at the end of the day and beyond a certain stage of loss sustenance, the viability of PAF would also be linked with nuclear brinkmanship.

Surprisingly, when most of us discuss warfare between India and Pakistan, the nuclear factor is completely overlooked. Both countries are nuclear powers and war-fighting can not be segregated from the nuclear overhang, as the Indian call such environment. The advantages accrued by the IAF gets limited beyond a certain stage and this is a fact of the nuclear environment that exist today and would remain in future as well. This factor needs to be understood. Sunerjee, a remarkable General, who came much ahead of his time to command the Indian Army, said it long time ago, that the days of Indian Army T-72s crossing the Sukkur barrage are long gone. And nukes were not even tested then. Yet he had this remarkable vision to predict then, which is now a reality.

One reason I think we do not discuss Nuclear brinkmanship of Pakistan is the fact that Pakistan has parroted much about the nukes and any sane leader would not go beyond to test the lunacy of some, which might be disastrous for India and fatal for Pakistan.

Another thing is that if you would have noticed the op is talking about Pakistan thrust inside India not the other way round, he could imagine such a scenario because India has the balls to follow a NFU policy. ( I would have liked to answer in a manner you do with the fascination for aunties and balls, but its too cliched already)

Majority of the people here do not seem comfortable discussing the nuclear brinkmanship issues. Probably because of the fact that such aspects are discussed above a certain level and people below that level people are only exposed to conventional war fighting techniques. Now this is my personal opinion and I may be wrong.

Nuclear war is not a very happy topic to discuss. It has nothing to do with your perceived exposure and superiority which comes with these imagined levels.

IAF did have this advantage, but many years ago. At this time, such an advantage as you perceive, does not exist. And as the time passes, this advantage will not be rising beyond PAF's response capabilities.

Please elaborate, or at least paste a link. We do have browsers which can handle links.

 

[Wickerman]

This is contingent upon the duration of the war effort, the type of operations and their duration, AD capabilities, and many other factors. And at the end of the day and beyond a certain stage of loss sustenance, the viability of PAF would also be linked with nuclear brinkmanship.

The advantage will always be on the side of the IAF, it has always been. India does enjoy a qualitative and quantitative advantage over the PAF at this point. In the case of a war, as time goes on, the advantage will progressively tilt in India's favor. The PAF's capabilities are significantly less than the IAF's to start with. And India can launch more sorties and pack a bigger punch initially. Although initial losses for the IAF would be heavy, as time wears on, Pakistan will not be able to sustain its significantly higher attrition rate.

The nuclear weapons usage will have to be discussed only if India undertakes an invasion or violation of Pakistani sovereignty in such a way to cross nuclear thresholds. A situation in which Pakistan feels that using nukes is the only way to safeguard its sovereignty. India is very well aware of the threat and this will definitely be factored in, in India's decision and strategy. As such, in the case of an Indian attack, India might also abandon the no first use policy, or even significantly monitor Pakistan's every move through the use of satellites and such and even launch a preemptive tactical nuclear strike to completely cripple its infrastructure. But this is a scenario that will never happen. India will never be the one to attack Pakistan.

So the only thing that can happen is for Pakistan to attack, and then be pressured to use nukes. This will never happen for a few reasons.

1. India has significantly higher second and third strike capability, using nukes. From the air, land and the sea. This will be disastrous for Pakistan. In case Pakistan ever uses nukes, India WILL nuke it, so Pakistan wont be in a position to stop a nuclear holocaust. This in itself should deter Pakistan.

2. The political angle. Pakistan wont be in a position to demand anything and will lose everything. Considering that Pakistan will already lose credibility even when they start the first conventional air raids. In the long term, this will be disastrous for Pakistan.

3. India being a much larger country by land area will be able to recover from a nuclear strike much better than Pakistan can

4. A nuclear strike on India is bound to not only affect India, but also Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and even China. Because of fallout and contamination carried by wind. This will prove disastrous for other countries as well.

Given all these factors only a moron with half a brain, will decide to use nukes against India.

IAF did have this advantage, but many years ago. At this time, such an advantage as you perceive, does not exist. And as the time passes, this advantage will not be rising beyond PAF's response capabilities.

Not true. Compared to the IAF, the PAF is much weaker qualitatively and quantitatively. PAF has around 80 F16s and about 100 JF 17s. Forgive me if my numbers are wrong and feel free to correct me. These 180 aircraft, can be tackled by the 160 odd Su 30MKIs themselves. The only other aircraft in PAFs inventory are the Dasault Mirage 3s and the F7s. These outdated planes can very well be tackled by the Mirage 2000s and the Mig 29s. This is as per current fleet strength, without taking into account the LCA, FGFA and Dassault Rafale.

 

[Ticker]

One reason I think we do not discuss Nuclear brinkmanship of Pakistan is the fact that Pakistan has parroted much about the nukes and any sane leader would not go beyond to test the lunacy of some, which might be disastrous for India and fatal for Pakistan.

Another thing is that if you would have noticed the op is talking about Pakistan thrust inside India not the other way round, he could imagine such a scenario because India has the balls to follow a NFU policy. ( I would have liked to answer in a manner you do with the fascination for aunties and balls, but its too cliched already)

Every nuclear power has its reasons for first use and no first use. US has a first use policy, so does Pakistan, China, Russia and India has NFU. I assure you it has nothing to do with even a cricket ball.

Nuclear war is not a very happy topic to discuss. It has nothing to do with your perceived exposure and superiority which comes with these imagined levels.

Warfare itself is not a happy topic to discuss.

Please elaborate, or at least paste a link. We do have browsers which can handle links.

I am the link. You use your browsers as it suits you.

 

[arp2041]

Every nuclear power has its reasons for first use and no first use. US has a first use policy, so does Pakistan, China, Russia and India has NFU. I assure you it has nothing to do with even a cricket ball.

Ya, Ya, if uncle don't have balls he becomes an Aunty

don't know why i said this

 

[KRAIT]

I think Aeronaut will be busy tonight cleaning nuke talks on this thread even when he issued the warning. Enough of exchange of nukes, no one is going to use it in our life time.

 

[Wickerman]

Every nuclear power has its reasons for first use and no first use. US has a first use policy, so does Pakistan, China, Russia and India has NFU. I assure you it has nothing to do with even a cricket ball.

True. India's first use policy is a facade. So as to not attract controversy. Hence why the NSG waiver was granted to India, and hence why even though the United States has been Pakistan's "friend" for a long time, they did not offer you the nuclear deal. Even refused when you asked. India doesnt just look at the military aspects of nukes, but also ramifications it has politically not just in the region, but internationally. Pakistan lacks this foresight. Not sure why.