What's new

DON'T HAVE ENOUGH JETS TO FIGHT 2 FRONT WAR INVOLVING CHINA AND PAKISTAN : IAF

I think SU35 doesn't give much boost against a upgraded MKI, Mig35 or saab gives a mid term solution

Agree with your idea that Su 35 may not give a big boost over MKI. So far as MIG 35 is concern, it can boost numbers at a very low cost. And that is what India need. There is no better plane in the world for interception and dog fight role than Mig 35. Yes, it lacks in range and multi role capability.
 
Just like there is almost no threat today or 2 decades from now from China's military but the US Mil is using it as their "boogeyman" to justify all kinds of absurd military spending. It is the purpose of these entities to make the case for more more more.

A two front scenario is definitely possible ; given the rapid increase in Chinese capabilities

Let us look at the two front scenario from a DIFFERENT angle

Suppose India is Not at all equipped for a Two front challenge

Now who will it ask for Help

Only Two countries : Russia and USA

Now imagine :
If Russia is in serious economic and political turmoil and it is facing problems
in Europe ; middle east and at home ie Chechnya etc

What will Russia do ; It will refuse to help India

And at the same time if US and China are in a tense situation
along with say US and Iran ; then even US will be un willing to help India

So it is much better to be prepared rather than going around ASKING for Help

There is NO two front scenario EVER!. It is total fiction and war warmongering brought up by India's military and associated hawkish bureaucrats to push their modernization requirements along.

The close relations between Pakistan and China and China's UNWILLINGNESS
to solve the border dispute puts a big Question mark on China's intentions

Add to it the periodic incursions ; and there is NO reason for us to trust China

In India 1962 is like it happened JUST YESTERDAY
 
The close relations between Pakistan and China and China's UNWILLINGNESS
to solve the border dispute puts a big Question mark on China's intentions

Add to it the periodic incursions ; and there is NO reason for us to trust China

In India 1962 is like it happened JUST YESTERDAY

And global warming is a myth put up by the libtards..

Yup.. sure.
 
Just in the spirit of what the Indian air chief is speculating, I just added the BD factor as well

and the counter argument to anyone rubbishing my suggestion is that BD becoming hostile is as unlikely as India having to face/ open two active fronts against both China and Pakistan It has never happened before has it?

Also, my comment about Indian Navy's combat air arm vs BD air force was not meant to be condescending towards BD air force. While asking the question originally I realized that I was missing the Indian Navy and its carrier here (which back in the 71 war played a very successful part).

so, for the sake of the wargaming and staying true to a hypothetical scenario of India facing multi-pronged air hostilities, I decided that IAF would have to worry much about BD air force’s sneak attack as it can be kept at check and reduced to a defensive role in the presence of Indian aircraft carrier and its entire support group in bay of Bengal.

People, sometimes do allow yourself a healthy and informative debate instead of sarcasm and insults, before you know it you will be spiting blood and poison from your nostrils and behinds if this habit translates into your daily life.


read my answer in the above part.
Depends entirely on the time frame.

If it is in the 2016-2025 period, then definitely No. We would have only 1 CBG. That is going to be put to use in Malacca to choke PLAN in the straits. A Carrier adds zero incremental gain against Pakistan as it is a neighbouring country and we have countless air bases against Pakistan plus our Heavy Fighter is extremely long range. It can even use air bases in South India to attack Pakistan and still have fuel to fly back there. Most of our military infrastructure is geared towards Pakistan. So the cost-benefit doesn't add up for using a Carrier against Pakistan.

A SAG(Surface Action Group) would be deployed off Pakistani coast definitely, but not a CBG.

If the attack period is after 2025, then there is a slight possibility of using a Carrier against BD because by then we would have 2 CBG's. With our current pace of shipbuilding, we are well on course to fielding 2 CBGs by 2025. The second Carrier being built now has already been floated out of dock, its structure is already built.

I use the word CBG and not just Carrier, because without its escorts (primarily long range AAW frigates/destroyers the kind of which are only just now entering service in IN and submarines) a carrier is dead meat.

If the plan is after 2030, then definitely. We would be a 3 Carrier force by then. Which is IN's goal as well.
Being a 3 CBG force. Each permanently deployed for each of India's coasts. One for Arabian Sea, One for BoB/Malacca Straits and the 3rd one in the yard in peacetime or in war time deployed to Southern Indian Ocean.
To be as polite as possible..

ABAY KAUNSI TWO FRONT WAR?!!
KYA KHA KAR AISA KHATARNAAK SAPNA VEKHA HAI SARDARJI!!??

Sprite ki botal pi aur dakar le.. gas upar charh gai hai.



There is NO two front scenario EVER!. It is total fiction and war warmongering brought up by India's military and associated hawkish bureaucrats to push their modernization requirements along.
I don't see the problem here. You hope for the best and plan for the worst.

There is a reason why Govt of India pushed so hard to resolve our border and maritime disputes with Bangladesh and Myanmar to the extent of giving away a massive additional 10,000 acres of land and tens of thousands of acres in sea in the final settlement. It is because we want to preempt any hostility with any other country and give any third party an opportunity to incite our neighbours.

Not just that we ensured that Bangladesh and Myanmar also resolved both their land and maritime borders in a full and final settlement.

Where there are irritants, there is a possibility of someone else taking advantage.

We conveyed to Sri Lanka that despite Tamil Nadu's constant desire to take some Islands from Sri Lanka, we will honour our agreement and not ask for it. That we have fully and finally settled our sea borders with Sri Lanka.

Now, India has -finally and thank god for it - resolved its borders(both land or sea) with all but 2 of its neighbours. We have settled our borders with Bhutan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Sri Lanka.
Not just that , we have ensured that our neighbours(BD and Myanmar) also have settled borders so that there is peace, trade and not instability there which affects us.
 
Last edited:
what is the possibility of having to face BD air force as well? just in case the regime in BD is not as favourable as the current one? in such unlikely scenario .does IAF worry about deploying few air assets? I am not aware if India even has an airforce base on the eastern side?
would Indian aircraft carrier alone be enough for taking out the BD airforce?
I think your point is quite interesting, but given the small fleet of bangladesh, it can be easily attributed into a service rate margin factor for China+Pak. If our assumption is a 5% of perceived service rat for the hostile forces ,that is more than enough to factor in bangladesh's air force.

But unlike the IAF brass, I don't think IAF has enough platforms to even to position itself for Air superiority of pakistan, forget a two front war.

@Oscar @PARIKRAMA
Force projections are looking quite bleak even with the additional rafales, and MKI's.

So just as an exercise of what options can be utilized to required squadron strength in short term.

1> Jaguar Darin III upgrades with all post 98 airframes re-engined to a tuned GTX-35VS with a throttled 46KN and afterburner 78 KN spec. Approx 98 units - All units transferred to IN for Maritime strike role.

2> Follow on 36 Rafales - direct procurement.

3> 45 follow on Mig29K, as per Strategic Road map for IN

5> LCA 1P increase to 300 units.

6> 2 squadrons of used Mig29SMT from RuAF upgraded to UPG standard.
 
I think your point is quite interesting, but given the small fleet of bangladesh, it can be easily attributed into a service rate margin factor for China+Pak. If our assumption is a 5% of perceived service rat for the hostile forces ,that is more than enough to factor in bangladesh's air force.

But unlike the IAF brass, I don't think IAF has enough platforms to even to position itself for Air superiority of pakistan, forget a two front war.

@Oscar @PARIKRAMA
Force projections are looking quite bleak even with the additional rafales, and MKI's.

So just as an exercise of what options can be utilized to required squadron strength in short term.

1> Jaguar Darin III upgrades with all post 98 airframes re-engined to a tuned GTX-35VS with a throttled 46KN and afterburner 78 KN spec. Approx 98 units - All units transferred to IN for Maritime strike role.

2> Follow on 36 Rafales - direct procurement.

3> 45 follow on Mig29K, as per Strategic Road map for IN

5> LCA 1P increase to 300 units.

6> 2 squadrons of used Mig29SMT from RuAF upgraded to UPG standard.
wonder if you have read my follow up posts too.. its like a hypothetical war gaming.
I am merely explaining myself since at one point PAF was also made to cover its western flank from Communist Afghanistan although the air threat was never a challenge in the 80s.
 
It's only the Indian armed forces who talk about a two-front war.

They just want more funding.

To be fair, the Nehru dynasty left their defense infrastructure in such a poor condition that it is understandable that they are pushing for more funding now, under a more nationalistic adminstration.
And yet defence spending has remained relatively static under this "nationalist" government, in fact, in GDP terms it has actually fallen (from 1.78% to 1.65%).

To the liklihood of a two front war, as remote as that seems, this is what the military gets paid to do- cater for every eventuality, they have to have contingency plans A-Z and a two front war remains plausible so prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

I agree with your point of Mig 35. However the question is why not Su35 (MKI version). ?
1) The IAF was less than impressed with the Su-35, they didn't see much benefit over their MKIs and are happy with the MKI.
2) The "Super" upgrade will bring the MKI roughly in line with the Su-35.
3) The entire purpose of selecting the Rafale is to offset the lower availability of Russian jets (specifically the MKI), going for more would be counter productive.
4) The life cycle costs would end up costing the IAF far more in the long term

@Oscar @PARIKRAMA
Force projections are looking quite bleak even with the additional rafales, and MKI's.

So just as an exercise of what options can be utilized to required squadron strength in short term.

1> Jaguar Darin III upgrades with all post 98 airframes re-engined to a tuned GTX-35VS with a throttled 46KN and afterburner 78 KN spec. Approx 98 units - All units transferred to IN for Maritime strike role.

2> Follow on 36 Rafales - direct procurement.

3> 45 follow on Mig29K, as per Strategic Road map for IN

5> LCA 1P increase to 300 units.

6> 2 squadrons of used Mig29SMT from RuAF upgraded to UPG standard.
The picture really isn't as bleak as it may seem sir. Plans being drawn up right now will address this issue within a decade and will do so in the most efficent manner by sticking to the IAF's laid down road map; MKI/FGFA, LCA, Rafale and AMCA. Deviating from this path (ordering off the shelf MMRCAs from other parties) will only be counter productive in the long term.

My friend @PARIKRAMA has a very good projection of how the IAF will meet their sanctioned strength by 2025 just with LCA, Rafale and MKI/FGFA.



+ The IN has no interest in shore based strike aircraft like the Jaguar (nor do they need to be in that business), that capability will remain with the IAF.
 
+ The IN has no interest in shore based strike aircraft like the Jaguar (nor do they need to be in that business), that capability will remain with the IAF.

I would actually like to see IN transgress into IAF domain. especially wrt to western maritime strike role.
 
I would actually like to see IN transgress into IAF domain. especially wrt to western maritime strike role.
Perhaps in the future, but as of now (and historically) the IN's fighter wing is 100% carrier borne- that is its explicit role, it does not have any demand for shore based fighters. Speaking practically, if the IAF's Jaguars were transfered to the IN today this would translate into a massive drop in the IAF's SQN strength- which is the measure used by the IAF,MOD and GoI to measure India's aviation prowess. No consideration is given to the IN's naval air arm in this regard, its considerable capabilites are not accounted for and thus the net result would be more scathing reports of IAF force depletion.
 
Perhaps in the future, but as of now (and historically) the IN's fighter wing is 100% carrier borne- that is its explicit role, it does not have any demand for shore based fighters. Speaking practically, if the IAF's Jaguars were transfered to the IN today this would translate into a massive drop in the IAF's SQN strength- which is the measure used by the IAF,MOD and GoI to measure India's aviation prowess. No consideration is given to the IN's naval air arm in this regard, its considerable capabilites are not accounted for and thus the net result would be more scathing reports of IAF force depletion.
And thus I mentioned additional Rafales/LCA 1p mix to supplement the shortfall of Jags. Manage the same 42 sanctioned strength for IAF but add another 6-8 squadrons to the Navy.

The scathing part is good, it's always good. :police:
 
And thus I mentioned additional Rafales/LCA 1p mix to supplement the shortfall of Jags. Manage the same 42 sanctioned strength for IAF but add another 6-8 squadrons to the Navy.
Fair enough but a further 6-8 SQNs to make up when the IAF is already struggling to attest depletion with the 42 SQN figure a distant dream. In reality the IAF will be asked to have 45 SQNs by 2025 in the coming years but they are not inducting nearly enough platforms and the MKI production run is to end in the near future (2019-21 at the latest). It is going to have to be the LCA and Rafale that make up the difference and between them there is a requirement for at least 200 more of each (with 126 LCA already ordered) but the key is production rates, they need to be in service asap and this is the real issue.


This is before we even factor in the IN's entirely seperate requirements, they too will require at least 100-150 additonal fighters by 2025.
The scathing part is good, it's always good. :police:
Agreed, it keeps an emphasis on delivery and performance.

+ sir, you should check out the Rafale sticky to see the latest discussion/developments on this front.
 
what is the possibility of having to face BD air force as well? just in case the regime in BD is not as favourable as the current one? in such unlikely scenario .does IAF worry about deploying few air assets? I am not aware if India even has an airforce base on the eastern side?
would Indian aircraft carrier alone be enough for taking out the BD airforce?

We will deploy Air India to take care of BD's Airfroce. They along with West Bengal police will wipe out BD's armed forces

It's only the Indian armed forces who talk about a two-front war.

They just want more funding.

To be fair, the Nehru dynasty left their defense infrastructure in such a poor condition that it is understandable that they are pushing for more funding now, under a more nationalistic adminstration.

I have never seen a comment as majestic & as logical as this :eek:
 
Back
Top Bottom