Ambala to station first squadron of MMRCA fighters

[veekysingh]

Stationing first Sqd against Pakistan sector still shows that Pak centric mentality. Had they stationed the first one in the Chinese opposite sector, we may have said there is a change, but as of now with this announcement, it seems there is no change in that mentality.

really? I will go by your logic- thr were some news that china will be placing its j-20 in Tibet(that's mean it will be for India sure cause I am not seeing Nepal or Bhutan gonna have a war with china ) so does it mean china is india centric?

 

[Awesome]

Stationing anything close to border proves a double edge sword, whatever benefit it may offer to the home security, with all the airborne and ground based gadgetry available, the other side can detect, monitor and counter every move of your assets.

They will pull it back during wartime

 

[Ticker]

India has 29 air bases against Pakistan as compared to about 6 odd against China. Though against China, IAF infrastructure is being improved in order to accommodate new inductions, no major additional airbase(s) has been announced as yet. Which means that against China only limited number of such aircraft squadrons can be accommodated and it is Pakistan where they have sufficient available space to induct additional aircraft squadrons.

This is because of their defence strategy against a two-front war environment, wherein India plays a deterring defence against Pakistan and dissuasive defence against China, though China has been declared as their number one enemy. Such a strategy does have an inherent disadvantage with regard to Indian response against China - they can not place more than what they can accommodate against China.

 

[Awesome]

Stationing first Sqd against Pakistan sector still shows that Pak centric mentality. Had they stationed the first one in the Chinese opposite sector, we may have said there is a change, but as of now with this announcement, it seems there is no change in that mentality.

You see, saying and doing are two separate things.

By saying we are Chinese centric and not Pakistan, its a status elevation for India. "Oh ji hum toh wadday log hain, Pakistan ke toh moonh hi nahi lagtay, Pakistan toh after thought hai". But when it comes to walk its talk "Pakistan ko dikhao, Rafale agaya hai humaray paas!"

Either that or they are afraid of China, so don't want to rock the boat too much by making such a symbolic gesture of enmity. Pakistan is purana dushman.

 

[Contrarian]

What if it entails, like Janon alluded to it, these prime air assets working in tandem with the Strike Corp in an Indian rendition of blitzkrieg to truly take away Pakistan's traditional advantage i.e us being able to bring our forces forward much earlier & perhaps even enjoy a day or twos worth of numerical superiority !

While it could play a part, I doubt that stationing the primary a2g plane of IAF at the border would make a difference to the strike corps.

The jets even if placed in the interiors would cover the distance to the border in a matter of minutes. The ability to blunt Pakistan's biggest advantage of faster mobilization lies with the Indian Army primarily.

As mentioned above, the IAF will pretty soon have round the clock coverage over a substantial part of Pakistan round the clock(owing to Pakistan's small width), so surprise raids may quite be a thing of the past in another decade. And this is not just related to AWACS.

It still does not answer our original question.

What the IAF is doing in this regard to IA's new doctrine is a build up of infrastructure.

The declared plan is to have all airbases upgraded to be able to handle all types of planes in IAF inventory along side of reducing(compared to the past) the types of fighters it operates.
Till recently IAF bases are geared exclusively towards a few types of fighters which meant only those types of planes would be able to use the airbase to its potential. This was a severe operational limitation. This is being changed now.

The second thing done to support the new leaning of the Army is opening of more ALG's, etc to be better able to transport people and equipment and having a denser network.

Along with this the third thing being done to support the Army's swift mobilization is having strategic air-lifters. A capability Indian Military lacked sorely. The Il-76's dont cut it.
The C-17's purchased will go a much much longer way than most people imagine in reducing IA deployment schedule. And being there to cater to emergency asset requirements across all Indian borders. It would alter the logistics tail of IA quite significantly.

You can imagine how much IAF and IA needed this by the fact that 10 have already been purchased and this makes India the 2nd biggest C-17 operator worldwide!
And in all likelihood 6 more will be purchased! And this is for an entirely new class of transport added to the IAF considering that Il's are not likely to be retired for a long time.

These 3 aspects are absolutely crucial to support the IA's new doctrine/practice/whatever different people call it.

 

[KRAIT]

You see, saying and doing are two separate things.

By saying we are Chinese centric and not Pakistan, its a status elevation for India. "Oh ji hum toh wadday log hain, Pakistan ke toh moonh hi nahi lagtay, Pakistan toh after thought hai". But when it comes to walk its talk "Pakistan ko dikhao, Rafale agaya hai humaray paas!"

Either that or they are afraid of China, so don't want to rock the boat too much by making such a symbolic gesture of enmity. Pakistan is purana dushman.

If we station against China, then Chinese guys says, you are being aggressive and especially Pakistani posters saying India is disturbing the peace even when China is increasing its infrastructure development in border region which is good for both civil and military purpose.

But if we station against Pakistan, you guys say, Pakistan is always the enemy and they always want to destabilize the peace process. Also that India is afraid of China.

Either we are coward or aggressive and disturbing peace force, Bravo.

Its not street aunties talks, "are main na kehti thi, dushman to hum hi hain".

"Woh badi sayaani hai, kehti hai ki bhabhi ji aap to ache log ho dusre padosi hi bekaar hain par mann hi mann hum se ladai rakhti hai."

Meri saari(read aircrafts) uski saari (read aircrafts) se jyada(more) safed(read advance) hai, kyun naa dikhaun padosi ko.

Every country has right to station its best aircrafts at their forward base to keep its first line of defense strongest. We don't want to fight the war at our turf, if we can take it to enemy's turf, which has its advantages and disadvantages.

So Aunty Talk logic doesn't work here my friend.

 

[Armstrong]

If we station against China, then Chinese guys says, you are being aggressive and especially Pakistani posters saying India is disturbing the peace even when China is increasing its infrastructure development in border region which is good for both civil and military purpose.

But if we station against Pakistan, you guys say, Pakistan is always the enemy and they always want to destabilize the peace process. Also that India is afraid of China.

Either we are coward or aggressive and disturbing peace force, Bravo.

Its not street aunties talks, "are main na kehti thi, dushman to hum hi hain".

"Woh badi sayaani hai, kehti hai ki bhabhi ji aap to ache log ho dusre padosi hi bekaar hain par mann hi mann hum se ladai rakhti hai."

Meri saari(read aircrafts) uski saari (read aircrafts) se jyada(more) safed(read advance) hai, kyun naa dikhaun padosi ko.

Every country has right to station its best aircrafts at their forward base to keep its first line of defense strongest. We don't want to fight the war at our turf, if we can take it to enemy's turf, which has its advantages and disadvantages.

So Aunty Talk logic doesn't work here my friend.

Oh God...Krait ain't a guy like a thought he was he ! Shes a middle-aged lady going through menopause juiced up on too many Saaas-Bahuuu Soap Operas !

 

[KRAIT]

Oh God...Krait ain't a guy like a thought he was he ! Shes a middle-aged lady going through menopause juiced up on too many Saaas-Bahuuu Soap Operas !

Buddy, I told how these Aunty logic is applied. I have seen it many times in real life and on this forum.

 

[Armstrong]

Buddy, I told how these Aunty logic is applied. I have seen it many times in real life and on this forum.

Only an Aunty would have explained it that eloquently hence I doubt !

 

[Contrarian]

You see, saying and doing are two separate things.

By saying we are Chinese centric and not Pakistan, its a status elevation for India. "Oh ji hum toh wadday log hain, Pakistan ke toh moonh hi nahi lagtay, Pakistan toh after thought hai". But when it comes to walk its talk "Pakistan ko dikhao, Rafale agaya hai humaray paas!"

Either that or they are afraid of China, so don't want to rock the boat too much by making such a symbolic gesture of enmity. Pakistan is purana dushman.

You are aware of how Indian military plans to handle a 2 front war scenario. Beat Pakistan
a)fast - time is of essence in this case - and
b)only enough(such that it's military is not able to launch any kind of offensive-even minor-into Indian territory), not keep fighting with the objectives that a solo war with Pakistsan would entail ,and then start shifting assets towards Chinese border.

It would make sense to have the gold plated assets lined up against Pakistan first. That does not in any way mean that China ceases to be the enemy India is oriented against.

Secondly, while this is a capability buildup, the actions on the ground are the opposite. The Indian Military banks on Indian polity to culture good enough relations with Pakistan - via economic interdependency and people - to ensure Pakistan does not try to take advantage of a skirmish with China.

For everyone understands India, China, the West - there will not be an Indian war with China, only skirmish(es)

 

[Ticker]

While it could play a part, I doubt that stationing the primary a2g plane of IAF at the border would make a difference to the strike corps.

The jets even if placed in the interiors would cover the distance to the border in a matter of minutes. The ability to blunt Pakistan's biggest advantage of faster mobilization lies with the Indian Army primarily.

As mentioned above, the IAF will pretty soon have round the clock coverage over a substantial part of Pakistan round the clock(owing to Pakistan's small width), so surprise raids may quite be a thing of the past in another decade. And this is not just related to AWACS.

It still does not answer our original question.

What the IAF is doing in this regard to IA's new doctrine is a build up of infrastructure.

The declared plan is to have all airbases upgraded to be able to handle all types of planes in IAF inventory along side of reducing(compared to the past) the types of fighters it operates.
Till recently IAF bases are geared exclusively towards a few types of fighters which meant only those types of planes would be able to use the airbase to its potential. This was a severe operational limitation. This is being changed now.

The second thing done to support the new leaning of the Army is opening of more ALG's, etc to be better able to transport people and equipment and having a denser network.

Along with this the third thing being done to support the Army's swift mobilization is having strategic air-lifters. A capability Indian Military lacked sorely. The Il-76's dont cut it.
The C-17's purchased will go a much much longer way than most people imagine in reducing IA deployment schedule. And being there to cater to emergency asset requirements across all Indian borders. It would alter the logistics tail of IA quite significantly.

You can imagine how much IAF and IA needed this by the fact that 10 have already been purchased and this makes India the 2nd biggest C-17 operator worldwide!
And in all likelihood 6 more will be purchased! And this is for an entirely new class of transport added to the IAF considering that Il's are not likely to be retired for a long time.

These 3 aspects are absolutely crucial to support the IA's new doctrine/practice/whatever different people call it.

Creating an infrastructure to accommodate all aircraft in inventory at all airbases - this is indeed a surprising statement. It is neither operationally nor economically appropriate and if undertaken, would take a lot more time than being envisaged.

If this is being done to hide the operational usage of various aircraft, again this is surprising. Such appropriation and disposition can be analyzed easily, and therefor is not necessary. For staging through operations, appropriate facilities can be created and improved and is a sensible thing to do - the IAF is practicing such stage through operations since some time now.

The army air-lift operations are undertaken for certain needs and requirements and is not the norm for normal mobilization and movement of troops. Because this is a limited commodity, and in any case can not air lift large number of troops with their equipment, it is not used for such routine operations.

 

[Armstrong]

Creating an infrastructure to accommodate all aircraft in inventory at all airbases - this is indeed a surprising statement. It is neither operationally nor economically appropriate and if undertaken, would take a lot more time than being envisaged.
If this is being done to hide the operational usage of various aircraft, again this is surprising. Such appropriation and disposition can be analyzed easily, and therefor is not necessary. For staging through operations, appropriate facilities can be created and improved and is a sensible thing to do - the IAF is practicing such stage through operations since some time now.

The army air-lift operations are undertaken for certain needs and requirements and is not the norm for normal mobilization and movement of troops. Because this is a limited commodity, and in any case can not air lift large number of troops with their equipment, it is not used for such routine operations.

How do our airbases fare in this regard ?

 

[TaimiKhan]

really? I will go by your logic- thr were some news that china will be placing its j-20 in Tibet(that's mean it will be for India sure cause I am not seeing Nepal or Bhutan gonna have a war with china ) so does it mean china is india centric?

Yeah, China has India centric mentality as well as in the long term other potential enemies to look at, that is why its having lot of its assets based there, plus for a long time they have been making their infrastructure strong just across the Indian border, as they fear more of a Sino-Indo conflict in the short term.

 

[Ticker]

You are aware of how Indian military plans to handle a 2 front war scenario. Beat Pakistan
a)fast - time is of essence in this case - and
b)only enough(such that it's military is not able to launch any kind of offensive-even minor-into Indian territory), not keep fighting with the objectives that a solo war with Pakistsan would entail ,and then start shifting assets towards Chinese border.

It would make sense to have the gold plated assets lined up against Pakistan first. That does not in any way mean that China ceases to be the enemy India is oriented against.

Secondly, while this is a capability buildup, the actions on the ground are the opposite. The Indian Military banks on Indian polity to culture good enough relations with Pakistan - via economic interdependency and people - to ensure Pakistan does not try to take advantage of a skirmish with China.

For everyone understands India, China, the West - there will not be an Indian war with China, only skirmish(es)

You see this where your strategic thinking is at odds within the three services and with the geopolitical environment that prevail and is emerging. This also highlights the lack of strategic thought and space given therein. Whereas Indian navy talks big about being the dominant force in Indian Ocean, Indian army talks about naxalites and problems in Nepal and Sri Lanka and Maldives and Bangladesh etc etc. The thinking between the two major elements of Indian defence forces are out of sync and if these are out of sync how are they going to maintain the power projection India so vociferously talks about.

 

[Ticker]

How do our airbases fare in this regard ?

Rather appropriately.