Does India need Fleet of Strategic Bombers?

[Capt.Popeye]

Discuss about the idea guys

In just one word: NO !
In the conflicts that can be imagined; the Strategic Bomber is an useless weapon, unless we decide to declare war on Finland or Iceland.
The ICBM fleet is good enough for whatever can be anticipated. And as somebody here mentioned: if at all one were to think about beefing up Long Range nuclear delivery capability; then SSBNs are better platforms.
So 'NO' to Strategic Bombers; very little utility for the investment.

 

[duhastmish]

India can't afford a bomber fleet. Also I don't see a need either. Only way can be if India design and manufactures an advance bomber on its own. Also India need an enemy sitting far away. Ironically India only have enemies surrounding it.

 

[Dash]

the bears can be configured for that, am I right? 

In just one word: NO !
In the conflicts that can be imagined; the Strategic Bomber is an useless weapon, unless we decide to declare war on Finland or Iceland.
The ICBM fleet is good enough for whatever can be anticipated. And as somebody here mentioned: if at all one were to think about beefing up Long Range nuclear delivery capability; then SSBNs are better platforms.
So 'NO' to Strategic Bombers; very little utility for the investment.

then one question and its not India specific. if its so useless why US and Russia are investing in this?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

the bears can be configured for that, am I right? 

then one question and its not India specific. if its so useless why US and Russia are investing in this?

1.The Bears can be configured for it.
2. If the Russians or the Americans have to attack each other; they are separated by thousands of miles; so the need the ICBMs primarily and the Bombers secondarily. Though in the present conditions; they need Strategic Bombers even less for each other. Its more for fighting an Expeditionary War with a third country in some remote part of the world. Even in that respect; more so for the Americans and less so for the Russians.

 

[Dash]

1.The Bears can be configured for it.
2. If the Russians or the Americans have to attack each other; they are separated by thousands of miles; so the need the ICBMs primarily and the Bombers secondarily. Though in the present conditions; they need Strategic Bombers even less for each other. Its more for fighting an Expeditionary War with a third country in some remote part of the world. Even in that respect; more so for the Americans and less so for the Russians.

Having said that, It still is a big puzzle, I mean when you have more effective means for delivery of bombs like SSBN and ICBMs, these guys are so inclined to invest billions in making a strat bomber.

Which basically means that strategic bomber is not 'ONLY' for nuke delivery, its basically after air supremacy is achieved you will send these for carpet bombing an bomb almost anything. and Yes, for massive destruction and precisely why India doesnt need that, could it be that simple?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Having said that, It still is a big puzzle, I mean when you have more effective means for delivery of bombs like SSBN and ICBMs, these guys are so inclined to invest billions in making a strat bomber.

Which basically means that strategic bomber is not 'ONLY' for nuke delivery, its basically after air supremacy is achieved you will send these for carpet bombing an bomb almost anything. and Yes, for massive destruction and precisely why India doesnt need that, could it be that simple?

Strategic Bombers will never probably get used for delivering Nukes in the future, just as they have not been used in the past (except the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings). All that they have is some phenomenal range; so do ICBMs but ICBMs will never get to deliver conventional warheads.......
The days of Strategic Bombers are running out in some sense.

 

[Dash]

Strategic Bombers will never probably get used for delivering Nukes in the future, just as they have not been used in the past (except the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings). All that they have is some phenomenal range; so do ICBMs but ICBMs will never get to deliver conventional warheads.......
The days of Strategic Bombers are running out in some sense.

Say after 10 years when US and Russia will have their next gen bombers ready, what do we say then?, the days are over or they are the last species? For general debating, can we say that the war strategy will evolve or will take a paradigm shift as if there were a need for these too that only these countries are able to see and we are not? may be there is something we are missing that these guys are not. May be at the arrival of unmanned systems which will take over deep strike, you will need a platform where accuracy doesnt matter but quantity?.....something that the strategic bombers can achieve with low cost and precision?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Say after 10 years when US and Russia will have their next gen bombers ready, what do we say then?, the days are over or they are the last species? For general debating, can we say that the war strategy will evolve or will take a paradigm shift as if there were a need for these too that only these countries are able to see and we are not? may be there is something we are missing that these guys are not. May be at the arrival of unmanned systems which will take over deep strike, you will need a platform where accuracy doesnt matter but quantity?.....something that the strategic bombers can achieve with low cost and precision?

Firstly; do you really think that they have a truly next-gen of Strategic Bombers in the works?

Secondly: what is there that Strategic Bombers can achieve with low cost and accuracy that other aircraft with AAR and ALCMs cannot achieve?

 

[Basel]

As per current and future scenario Strategic Bombers don't seems to fit in Indian doctrine or needs because their all adversaries are in range of their triad and they don't have foes far in west or east, their air force have MKI and upcoming Rafael to do the job of a bomber.

Even if they wanted a specialized bomber then Su-34's customized version will fit in Indian doctrine much better than any other plane, and I think they are evaluating it or have ordered some. please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[IND151]

1.The Bears can be configured for it.
2. If the Russians or the Americans have to attack each other; they are separated by thousands of miles; so the need the ICBMs primarily and the Bombers secondarily. Though in the present conditions; they need Strategic Bombers even less for each other. Its more for fighting an Expeditionary War with a third country in some remote part of the world. Even in that respect; more so for the Americans and less so for the Russians.

Thats what I thought; I think they can equip Tu-142 with rotary launcher and there should not be much problem as TU-95 MS/MS16 are based on TU-142 airframe.

BTW ALCM armed bombers can be used to attack military bases in east china sea and PLAN ships while remaining out of reach of PLAAF fighters.

This is possible if such bombers are equipped with Nirbhay/ Nirbhay 2; they can act as LR Stand Off Launchers, fire missiles and return to base. 

1.The Bears can be configured for it.
2. If the Russians or the Americans have to attack each other; they are separated by thousands of miles; so the need the ICBMs primarily and the Bombers secondarily. Though in the present conditions; they need Strategic Bombers even less for each other. Its more for fighting an Expeditionary War with a third country in some remote part of the world. Even in that respect; more so for the Americans and less so for the Russians.

Right and though Alaska is close to Russia (only 55 miles), Alaska is not mainland US.

 

[IND151]

@Capt.Popeye >

Such bombers will act as force multipliers as each aircraft will be able to carry 6 to 8 Nirbhay ALCM (with 1000/ 2,000 KM range :Nirbhay 2).

MKI at max can carry only 2 Nirbhays (SU-30 can carry 2 KH-55s) and it doesn't offer that much range.

The idea is attacking chinese shores or bases while remaining far out side their defensive zones.

 

[帅的一匹]

@Capt.Popeye >

Such bombers will act as force multipliers as each aircraft will be able to carry 6 to 8 Nirbhay ALCM (with 1000/ 2,000 KM range :Nirbhay 2).

MKI at max can carry only 2 Nirbhays (SU-30 can carry 2 KH-55s) and it doesn't offer that much range.

The idea is attacking chinese shores or bases while remaining far out side their defensive zones.

Until you get those dreamer bombers, our pilotes might already have driven UFO. 

@Capt.Popeye >

Such bombers will act as force multipliers as each aircraft will be able to carry 6 to 8 Nirbhay ALCM (with 1000/ 2,000 KM range :Nirbhay 2).

MKI at max can carry only 2 Nirbhays (SU-30 can carry 2 KH-55s) and it doesn't offer that much range.

The idea is attacking chinese shores or bases while remaining far out side their defensive zones.

Better save your own a$$ instead of attacking our shores, your pathetic air fleet is gonna varnish in the pace of crash like nowadays. 

@Capt.Popeye >

Such bombers will act as force multipliers as each aircraft will be able to carry 6 to 8 Nirbhay ALCM (with 1000/ 2,000 KM range :Nirbhay 2).

MKI at max can carry only 2 Nirbhays (SU-30 can carry 2 KH-55s) and it doesn't offer that much range.

The idea is attacking chinese shores or bases while remaining far out side their defensive zones.

Why you not suggest OP to change this thread to 'shall we have strategic bombers to attack Chinese shores?' 
Your post sounds extremely disgusting

 

[cirr]

Unless India wants a place at the top table。。。。。。no，there is no need for strategic bombers which are expensive and difficult to develop and costly to maintain。

China is working on 2 versions of stealth bombers，one tactical with conventional configuration（prototype expected in 2014，combat range 3500-4000km）and the other strategic wing-shaped similar to B-2。India would be hard pushed to dovetail China's every move。 
India‘s immediate priority is to make a success of its cruise missile programme。

 

[Echo_419]

Until you get those dreamer bombers, our pilotes might already have driven UFO. 


Better save your own a$$ instead of attacking our shores, your pathetic air fleet is gonna varnish in the pace of crash like nowadays. 


Why you not suggest OP to change this thread to 'shall we have strategic bombers to attack Chinese shores?' 
Your post sounds extremely disgusting

Come on man We are just Analyzing the threat
Since China is such a huge Economic & Military
& we did not used bad kind of words
Take a chill pill

 

[janon]

As per current and future scenario Strategic Bombers don't seems to fit in Indian doctrine or needs because their all adversaries are in range of their triad and they don't have foes far in west or east, their air force have MKI and upcoming Rafael to do the job of a bomber.

Even if they wanted a specialized bomber then Su-34's customized version will fit in Indian doctrine much better than any other plane, and I think they are evaluating it or have ordered some. please correct me if I am wrong.

Wrong on the last part. India has neither ordered nor (AFAIK) evaluated Su-34s. 

@Capt.Popeye >

Such bombers will act as force multipliers as each aircraft will be able to carry 6 to 8 Nirbhay ALCM (with 1000/ 2,000 KM range :Nirbhay 2).

MKI at max can carry only 2 Nirbhays (SU-30 can carry 2 KH-55s) and it doesn't offer that much range.

The idea is attacking chinese shores or bases while remaining far out side their defensive zones.

Then it makes sense to have four MKIs rather than a cruise missile carrier that carries 8 missiles. Value for money; The MKIs can also do a lot of other tasks like air dominance and air superiority and all the rest, while when the need arises to launch 8 cruise missiles, we can send four of the MKIs with two each, instead of maintaining a strategic bomber for that.

Besides, the MKIs will be much more survivable against aerial threats and SAMs, unlike huge bombers which can be detected, tracked and brought down easily.