India is currently experiencing the most peaceful and prosperous time in its entire history.
A lack of historical reading and superficial analysis leads to such basic mistakes.
India vs China - War Gaming Scenarios : Related News , Updates , Discussions & Analysis .
- Thread starter _Anonymous_
- Start date
A lack of historical reading and superficial analysis leads to such basic mistakes.
Yes and no. It's a setback, but it was also Modi's third term so there was risk involved.
BJP lost 37 seats to the Congress but it was due to local politics not related to Congress but due to BJP's own mistakes. In some states, Modi had become way too overconfident and ignored local politics. And then, Modi brought in some party reforms that some MPs didn't like so they joined Congress and won for them. In one state, his allies fought and split up. In another state, low caste voters were lied to by Congress and a local party. So all these losses are very likely temporary. In the state where BJP and allies fought and split up, just last month BJP and its remaining allies won 235 out of 288 seats.
In any case, BJP has the support of the middle class and rich. So even with a coalition govt, all they have to do is deliver economic growth and things will fall into the place over time. The greatest threat to India is not from Pakistan or China but internal ones due to divisions created by Congress and the American/UK deep state. If Trump destroys the American deep state then Congress' biggest backers and India's greatest "societal enemy" will disappear. Modi is likely to win the next election too, so there's roughly 10 years of productivity ensured. As long as the US stops interfering in India during Trump's term and potentially the next term is also Republican, it will go well for India.
If you compare all the central elections from 2014 onwards to a war, then Modi has fought 3 battles, he's won 2 total victories and 1 decisive victory. If his next battle in 2029 is also another decisive victory, it's enough to win the war.
Looks like RST & myself watched 2 different documentaries or maybe the sub titles were different. These were my initial thoughts till I checked the timestamp for when RST made his post - 9:28. Yup. Post 8 pm .
A proper comparison begins with a background & a brief introduction of the subject to be covered which in this case happens to be the war , how & where will it be waged apart from speculating how it begins , it's consequences more so considering these are 2 N powers warring & the aftermath among other issues.
Usually one starts by comparing the size of the armed forces ( no sweetie , it's not what you think it means @Innominate ) which he does a fairly decent job of.
He didn't assume India's forces will be on the plains . He's assuming the Chinese on the strength of their superior air & missile power ( apart from superior logistics , ISR , ADS , Cyber capabilities , etc - these being mine & not Simon Whistler's - the narrator's assumption ) will achieve a breakthrough across multiple passes in the LAC bringing them onto the plains where the second phase of the war will commence as per him.
He's probably going by the track record of the IA in the 1962 war when the PLA broke through in NEFA now Arunachal Pradesh & landed in the plains of Assam.
While there's a danger that could come to pass , I don't think it will partly coz the CCP isn't interested in fighting in the plains where we'd be at an advantage , partly if we secure our logistics & supply lines like the Viet Cong by going underground. They tunneled below the surface , we'd have to bore tunnels in mountains to secure safe spots for storage of arms , ammo , platforms including tanks , IFVs , artillery , hptrs & FAs , food & other supplies , field hospitals , recuperation , R&R , etc .
While we're undertaking these measures , one doesn't know to what extent we are for obvious reasons. This is of vital importance which one can't stress enough particularly given the sub standard fighting abilities of the IAF & the lack of adequate vectors to target their bases logistics & supply lines on the front lines ( Xinjiang & Tibet & to an extent in Gansu Qinghai , Sichuan & Yunnan ) apart from the hinterland when they start targeting our strategic assets in the mainland &/or population centres.
I think it's quite clear he was referring to the present scenario w.r.t troop deployment. He's started out by saying both countries have a million plus personnel in their respective armies. So I really don't know where this - "He also thinks both sides have 100k troops in total , "comes from.
This is what I was referring to when I started out by writing it seems as though RST & myself saw 2 different documentaries or at any rate the sub titles were different. Then I did the wise thing & checked the timestamp - 9:28 pm . Yup .That's 8 pm right there. I'd point out more such instances as we go along .
While I won't comment on the ORBAT figures RST has put out my own input here would be ORBAT's are always subject to change.
But we've to begin somewhere I guess . Hence while I'd take the ORBAT figures as informative , the entire tantrum thrown by RST was because in his 8 pm perception the documentary made an error in detailing the number of troops both the armies contained. People are welcome to see the documentary ( it's < 30 min ) & judge.
My input here which I've already clearly delineated some time back is the introduction of the ill conceived , ill designed , ill advised & certainly if not the former two the ill timed Agniveer program which by 2030 will be fully operational & will come precisely around the time the last of our veteran jawans recruited under the previous program will be exiting & more to the point around the same time I expect the Chinese to launch their campaign.
We still have time to course correct which in what the experts have advised is to extend the service tenure to 8 years from the current 4 & to increase the intake from the current 25% to at least 50% .
I'd be very curious to know how exactly has technology improved the acclimatization process especially during wartime where presumably those oxygen tents the Chinese have erected will fly the white flag or the Red Cross & we'd be expected not to target them just like in those bygone days where sides fought honourably like in the Mahabharata except they didn't exactly fight honorably in the Mahabharata too unless of course RST is suggesting PLA soldiers will come with OBOGS in their winter clothing. Asking for evidence from RST for such claims is always futile given past experience.
Ah , here comes the catch all - the exclusions just to give RST escape routes just so he isn't pinned down @ Plus the "graudal" is not bad. The Chinese are gonna struggle a bit more, but doable.
Those ADS can & will be targeted by the Chinese Rocket Forces , Drones , ISR , PLAAF etc not necessarily in that order. That's where our langda IAF will be up sh!t creek for lack of offensive platforms to tackle whatever the Chinese throw at us . Actually this documentary hasn't touched upon the other aspects I've highlighted at all. Not that we do well there . But that would have strengthened his argument further.
Pls note @Rajput Lion , the same old game is back . Same old wine in new bottle . A variation of the old game -
J-20 > F-35
F-35 > / = Rafale
BUT
Rafale > J-20.
I suppose all those fleet refuellers PLAAF has built up / is building up is for fun. Besides with their prowess in building infrastructure how long will it take for them to construct make shift air strips to land & take off . After all it's the Tibetan plateau we're talking off which has it's own set of advantages & disadvantages besides of course Xinjiang. They've a plethora of bases in the surrounding provinces .
I was under the impression if capacities & capabilities exist will & plans can always change.
I'm also very curious to learn of the limited progress they've made .
Taiwan's airfields are on an island with little natural defenses , > 200 kms from the Chinese coast.
I see @ Basically , they've little intention of fighting an air war with India at this point in time. Presumably the powers that be in the PLAAF or CMC whispered this into RST's ears or it could be what you suspect gentlemen & the sole lady around here suspect - the 8 pm effect. Yessir. This seems more plausible.
It was always a waste for all parties involved if both parties lost. Clearly as the last engagement showed one side did. The other was blustering & reduced to a pitiful figure by the end of the encounter. Plus as of the present we're still not going the whole hog to deter the enemy but are undertaking whatever we are in piece meal manner. Why won't the Chinese past masters at real politik & deception not smell blood in the waters.
Granted it's not 1962 but then it's not 1962 for the Chinese too . They've definitely come a long way since then having travelled much further than we have.
The fact that the RFI of the revised MRFA tender was released long ago NOT to be followed up by the RFP shows that 56" was rattled . That much can be clearly gleaned by recent press reports which have stated in as many words the GoI will be following " due process " which obviously means no G2G .
It's all falling in place now . The late Gen Rawat's serious recommendations to the IAF to go in for tranches was to avoid the tender imbroglio which in turn was insisted upon by the IAF given their past experiences where piece meal deals can be abruptly terminated by a change in government or change in priorities or some other issue .
The fallout of this tragicomic farce is the pathetic current state of the IAF. Even if they were to agree to a G2G today their preferred FA - the Rafale won't come before 2030.
"MMRCA was over a decade old & no longer relevant. " The fact that practically all those who participated in the MMRCA will be participating in the MRFA with the same wares are perhaps lost on RST. It should be. It's the 8 pm effect.
Everybody knows what they're doing & everybody's doing precisely what they want to is the reason we have this thread & we're having this miserable conversation coz we're in the situation we're in .
I've come across the phrase - act in haste , repent in leisure . The IAF / MoD / GoI has come up with a variation on it - act leisurely , after all there's a lifetime left to repent.
Something tells me for his legacy , all the good 56" has done will be forgotten but this blunder will tarnish his memory & image forever. If he's smart he'd know when to have a stroke like chachaji thereby deflecting blame , changing the narrative & becoming a subject of sympathy instead of revulsion.
I truly hope I'm wrong on this one. Nothing would give me more pleasure.
A proper comparison begins with a background & a brief introduction of the subject to be covered which in this case happens to be the war , how & where will it be waged apart from speculating how it begins , it's consequences more so considering these are 2 N powers warring & the aftermath among other issues.
Usually one starts by comparing the size of the armed forces ( no sweetie , it's not what you think it means @Innominate ) which he does a fairly decent job of.
He didn't assume India's forces will be on the plains . He's assuming the Chinese on the strength of their superior air & missile power ( apart from superior logistics , ISR , ADS , Cyber capabilities , etc - these being mine & not Simon Whistler's - the narrator's assumption ) will achieve a breakthrough across multiple passes in the LAC bringing them onto the plains where the second phase of the war will commence as per him.
He's probably going by the track record of the IA in the 1962 war when the PLA broke through in NEFA now Arunachal Pradesh & landed in the plains of Assam.
While there's a danger that could come to pass , I don't think it will partly coz the CCP isn't interested in fighting in the plains where we'd be at an advantage , partly if we secure our logistics & supply lines like the Viet Cong by going underground. They tunneled below the surface , we'd have to bore tunnels in mountains to secure safe spots for storage of arms , ammo , platforms including tanks , IFVs , artillery , hptrs & FAs , food & other supplies , field hospitals , recuperation , R&R , etc .
While we're undertaking these measures , one doesn't know to what extent we are for obvious reasons. This is of vital importance which one can't stress enough particularly given the sub standard fighting abilities of the IAF & the lack of adequate vectors to target their bases logistics & supply lines on the front lines ( Xinjiang & Tibet & to an extent in Gansu Qinghai , Sichuan & Yunnan ) apart from the hinterland when they start targeting our strategic assets in the mainland &/or population centres.
I think it's quite clear he was referring to the present scenario w.r.t troop deployment. He's started out by saying both countries have a million plus personnel in their respective armies. So I really don't know where this - "He also thinks both sides have 100k troops in total , "comes from.
This is what I was referring to when I started out by writing it seems as though RST & myself saw 2 different documentaries or at any rate the sub titles were different. Then I did the wise thing & checked the timestamp - 9:28 pm . Yup .That's 8 pm right there. I'd point out more such instances as we go along .
While I won't comment on the ORBAT figures RST has put out my own input here would be ORBAT's are always subject to change.
But we've to begin somewhere I guess . Hence while I'd take the ORBAT figures as informative , the entire tantrum thrown by RST was because in his 8 pm perception the documentary made an error in detailing the number of troops both the armies contained. People are welcome to see the documentary ( it's < 30 min ) & judge.
My input here which I've already clearly delineated some time back is the introduction of the ill conceived , ill designed , ill advised & certainly if not the former two the ill timed Agniveer program which by 2030 will be fully operational & will come precisely around the time the last of our veteran jawans recruited under the previous program will be exiting & more to the point around the same time I expect the Chinese to launch their campaign.
We still have time to course correct which in what the experts have advised is to extend the service tenure to 8 years from the current 4 & to increase the intake from the current 25% to at least 50% .
I'd be very curious to know how exactly has technology improved the acclimatization process especially during wartime where presumably those oxygen tents the Chinese have erected will fly the white flag or the Red Cross & we'd be expected not to target them just like in those bygone days where sides fought honourably like in the Mahabharata except they didn't exactly fight honorably in the Mahabharata too unless of course RST is suggesting PLA soldiers will come with OBOGS in their winter clothing. Asking for evidence from RST for such claims is always futile given past experience.
Ah , here comes the catch all - the exclusions just to give RST escape routes just so he isn't pinned down @ Plus the "graudal" is not bad. The Chinese are gonna struggle a bit more, but doable.
Those ADS can & will be targeted by the Chinese Rocket Forces , Drones , ISR , PLAAF etc not necessarily in that order. That's where our langda IAF will be up sh!t creek for lack of offensive platforms to tackle whatever the Chinese throw at us . Actually this documentary hasn't touched upon the other aspects I've highlighted at all. Not that we do well there . But that would have strengthened his argument further.
Pls note @Rajput Lion , the same old game is back . Same old wine in new bottle . A variation of the old game -
J-20 > F-35
F-35 > / = Rafale
BUT
Rafale > J-20.
I suppose all those fleet refuellers PLAAF has built up / is building up is for fun. Besides with their prowess in building infrastructure how long will it take for them to construct make shift air strips to land & take off . After all it's the Tibetan plateau we're talking off which has it's own set of advantages & disadvantages besides of course Xinjiang. They've a plethora of bases in the surrounding provinces .
I was under the impression if capacities & capabilities exist will & plans can always change.
I'm also very curious to learn of the limited progress they've made .
Taiwan's airfields are on an island with little natural defenses , > 200 kms from the Chinese coast.
I see @ Basically , they've little intention of fighting an air war with India at this point in time. Presumably the powers that be in the PLAAF or CMC whispered this into RST's ears or it could be what you suspect gentlemen & the sole lady around here suspect - the 8 pm effect. Yessir. This seems more plausible.
It was always a waste for all parties involved if both parties lost. Clearly as the last engagement showed one side did. The other was blustering & reduced to a pitiful figure by the end of the encounter. Plus as of the present we're still not going the whole hog to deter the enemy but are undertaking whatever we are in piece meal manner. Why won't the Chinese past masters at real politik & deception not smell blood in the waters.
Granted it's not 1962 but then it's not 1962 for the Chinese too . They've definitely come a long way since then having travelled much further than we have.
The fact that the RFI of the revised MRFA tender was released long ago NOT to be followed up by the RFP shows that 56" was rattled . That much can be clearly gleaned by recent press reports which have stated in as many words the GoI will be following " due process " which obviously means no G2G .
It's all falling in place now . The late Gen Rawat's serious recommendations to the IAF to go in for tranches was to avoid the tender imbroglio which in turn was insisted upon by the IAF given their past experiences where piece meal deals can be abruptly terminated by a change in government or change in priorities or some other issue .
The fallout of this tragicomic farce is the pathetic current state of the IAF. Even if they were to agree to a G2G today their preferred FA - the Rafale won't come before 2030.
"MMRCA was over a decade old & no longer relevant. " The fact that practically all those who participated in the MMRCA will be participating in the MRFA with the same wares are perhaps lost on RST. It should be. It's the 8 pm effect.
Everybody knows what they're doing & everybody's doing precisely what they want to is the reason we have this thread & we're having this miserable conversation coz we're in the situation we're in .
I've come across the phrase - act in haste , repent in leisure . The IAF / MoD / GoI has come up with a variation on it - act leisurely , after all there's a lifetime left to repent.
Something tells me for his legacy , all the good 56" has done will be forgotten but this blunder will tarnish his memory & image forever. If he's smart he'd know when to have a stroke like chachaji thereby deflecting blame , changing the narrative & becoming a subject of sympathy instead of revulsion.
I truly hope I'm wrong on this one. Nothing would give me more pleasure.
So many words, but no substance. The only thing right in all that rubbish is getting the 8 pm is before 9 pm fact right. The video has more substance, even though it's utter crap.
First off, 1962 has no relevance today. It was an entirely different situation.
Second, Tibet itself is 4300-4500m above sea level so the minute the Chinese troops hit the plateau, they have already been through acclimatization, that's hundreds of kms away from the frontline. Plus you can hide plenty of hyperbaric chambers in tents and underground long before the Chinese troops enter anywhere close to the IA forces.
There's a huge difference between posting whatever comes to mind and actually thinking things through before posting. Rub the cue tip until you feel resistance. The entire concept is IA is on the defensive and is forward deployed to meet any contingency ASAP because the Chinese are on the offensive and they decide when to acclimatize troops before concentrating forces inside Tibet. So, before entering Tibet, they not only have their offensive troops acclimatized, but also the reserves and other defensive troops.
Third, Agnipath was specifically designed to deal with China. Whether we need 25%, 40% or 50% is entirely incumbent on real world studies, not opinions of people. And initial studies have shown Agniveers are far more motivated than regular recruits. So people need to get over it. Then there's the fact that we need a larger number of yearly recruitments to build a larger reserve force. Ukraine has shown that a similar combat environment will eat up troops.
Furthermore, things haven't really changed for the army. Previously, the army used to recruit 40k+ troops every year, sometimes up to 60k. But now recruitment numbers will climb up to 150k, and 25% of that is quite close to 40k. If they decide to increase intake to 35%, then they will meet their previous yearly quota right off the bat. This leaves 100k troops every year for other roles. Now I leave it to your imagination what we can do with 100k trained and experienced troops every year.
Think logically. Assam Rifles is 65k strong. Rashtriya Rifles is 45k strong. But the Agniveers are 100k additional troops "every single year." Do I need to remind people how many fronts we are fighting on? Yeah, so the govt is on to something, so leave them to deal with it. I hope it's "graudally" understood, as the cue tip resistance builds up.
All their rocket forces are impressive, but given our basing infra versus theirs, even our measly numbers are enough to keep them in check. And yeah, they can build new bases, but they haven't yet. And even if they start the process it will take years to finish. Our air defenses are better and more advanced than theirs. To put that in perspective, the Chinese defensive capabilities are a lot closer to Iran's than Israel's and our offensive capabilities are a lot closer to Israel's than Iran's, and our defensive capabilities are better than Israel's, although not with similar coverage due to obvious reasons. The Chinese are still playing with very old tech, so we still retain a significant advantage on this front. And the Chinese do not have sufficient coverage in Tibet either, unlike other areas, which is of higher priority to them.
Refuellers, lol. Gotta gets the basics rights before venturing into complex subjects like refuellers, where we need "very complex" 5th standard calculations like speed, distance, and time. Merely the fact that PLAAF has to use refuellers to try and match the IAF while sharing a border should tell you all you need to know.
Well, duh!!! The F-35's advantages as a stealth design are superceeded by the J-20 and the J-20's non-stealth advantages are superceeded by Rafale's non-stealth advantages, and given the environment, the J-20 is significantly inferior to the Rafale due to factors like low altitude performance, terrain-following, turnaround and maintenance. For example, the Rafale can supercruise like the J-20 while the F-35 cannot. But the Rafale can have a significantly higher turnaround time compared to the J-20, so the J-20 cannot compete with the Rafale here, but the F-35 can. This means it will take the Chinese as much as 100 J-20s just to match the presence of 36 Rafales, all 'cause of speed, distance and time. If the Chinese had the F-35, it would have been a greater threat to the IAF than the J-20. Nuances. Specifics. This is why Ignorants will always remain Ignorants. It's a lifelong title.
First off, 1962 has no relevance today. It was an entirely different situation.
Second, Tibet itself is 4300-4500m above sea level so the minute the Chinese troops hit the plateau, they have already been through acclimatization, that's hundreds of kms away from the frontline. Plus you can hide plenty of hyperbaric chambers in tents and underground long before the Chinese troops enter anywhere close to the IA forces.
There's a huge difference between posting whatever comes to mind and actually thinking things through before posting. Rub the cue tip until you feel resistance. The entire concept is IA is on the defensive and is forward deployed to meet any contingency ASAP because the Chinese are on the offensive and they decide when to acclimatize troops before concentrating forces inside Tibet. So, before entering Tibet, they not only have their offensive troops acclimatized, but also the reserves and other defensive troops.
Third, Agnipath was specifically designed to deal with China. Whether we need 25%, 40% or 50% is entirely incumbent on real world studies, not opinions of people. And initial studies have shown Agniveers are far more motivated than regular recruits. So people need to get over it. Then there's the fact that we need a larger number of yearly recruitments to build a larger reserve force. Ukraine has shown that a similar combat environment will eat up troops.
Furthermore, things haven't really changed for the army. Previously, the army used to recruit 40k+ troops every year, sometimes up to 60k. But now recruitment numbers will climb up to 150k, and 25% of that is quite close to 40k. If they decide to increase intake to 35%, then they will meet their previous yearly quota right off the bat. This leaves 100k troops every year for other roles. Now I leave it to your imagination what we can do with 100k trained and experienced troops every year.
Think logically. Assam Rifles is 65k strong. Rashtriya Rifles is 45k strong. But the Agniveers are 100k additional troops "every single year." Do I need to remind people how many fronts we are fighting on? Yeah, so the govt is on to something, so leave them to deal with it. I hope it's "graudally" understood, as the cue tip resistance builds up.
All their rocket forces are impressive, but given our basing infra versus theirs, even our measly numbers are enough to keep them in check. And yeah, they can build new bases, but they haven't yet. And even if they start the process it will take years to finish. Our air defenses are better and more advanced than theirs. To put that in perspective, the Chinese defensive capabilities are a lot closer to Iran's than Israel's and our offensive capabilities are a lot closer to Israel's than Iran's, and our defensive capabilities are better than Israel's, although not with similar coverage due to obvious reasons. The Chinese are still playing with very old tech, so we still retain a significant advantage on this front. And the Chinese do not have sufficient coverage in Tibet either, unlike other areas, which is of higher priority to them.
Refuellers, lol. Gotta gets the basics rights before venturing into complex subjects like refuellers, where we need "very complex" 5th standard calculations like speed, distance, and time. Merely the fact that PLAAF has to use refuellers to try and match the IAF while sharing a border should tell you all you need to know.
Well, duh!!! The F-35's advantages as a stealth design are superceeded by the J-20 and the J-20's non-stealth advantages are superceeded by Rafale's non-stealth advantages, and given the environment, the J-20 is significantly inferior to the Rafale due to factors like low altitude performance, terrain-following, turnaround and maintenance. For example, the Rafale can supercruise like the J-20 while the F-35 cannot. But the Rafale can have a significantly higher turnaround time compared to the J-20, so the J-20 cannot compete with the Rafale here, but the F-35 can. This means it will take the Chinese as much as 100 J-20s just to match the presence of 36 Rafales, all 'cause of speed, distance and time. If the Chinese had the F-35, it would have been a greater threat to the IAF than the J-20. Nuances. Specifics. This is why Ignorants will always remain Ignorants. It's a lifelong title.
Forgot to add the MRFA bit. But it's better this way.
"MMRCA was over a decade old & no longer relevant." - What this means is MMRCA's configuration was created in 2005-07, so it was no longer relevant in 2018 or 2024-25. The fact that the jets are the same is irrelevant. What's relevant is the avionics carried. Now we have learned that Rafale F5 will not only have completely new avionics, but also a new engine. And of course a new drone. Had the IAF decided to follow what GoI or CDS Rawat wanted, they would have been stuck with the current block. The new avionics, engine and drone push Rafale closer to 6th gen than F3R.
So if that has to be restated for simpler minds, it's basically saying Rafale F3/F3R is no longer relevant so the IAF needs a new tender for next gen versions of the same aircraft. Similarly, the Mig-35 of today is of a different configuration than the one that participated in MMRCA. Typhoon is now in a Tranche 4B configuration.
It takes just 10 years to introduce new technologies, which is why the IAF had planned for MKI (2000), MMRCA (2010), FGFA (2020) and AMCA (2030) in 10-year intervals. There was an old 6th gen program (2040) planned too (JV or import). MRFA takes that into account.
The IAF's interest in a tender had nothing to do with 56" or Joker. Both SE and TE MIIs were supposed to be tenders, and this was decided even before the Rafale deal was signed. Considering MRFA RFI was released in 2018, it most likely began in 2015 itself, after MMRCA was officially junked.
Now comes the question of just buying the Rafale via GTG like the UAE did. This gives us four problems. One, the IAF has reason enough to fear downgrades, especially downgrades that can later be sold as upgrades. Competition forces the OEMs to disclose more of their tech. For example, if we go through with a GTG deal right away, then Dassault could offer a radar with 200 km range, and offer the actual range of 250 km as a paid software upgrade. This is less likely via tender, where the IAF will value jets that surpass requirements.
Two, the IAF doesn't know what else the French have developed. A tender will force Dassault to show more of the cards in their hands due to fear of the competition showing off equal or better tech. The higher the requirements, the more difficult it becomes for the less advanced ones to compete. For example, if all OEMs have cognitive EW, then Dassault will have to show off more advanced modes than their competitors, even stuff they had not planned to show.
Three, the IAF doesn't know what else is out there. Other OEMs know what Rafale's coming with and they will have to showcase technologies they think people in France haven't thought of yet. Similarly, the French will have to reciprocate.
Four, without a competition Dassault can quote any amount they want.
Only tenders give you the luxury of setting your own rules. While the first two problems are subject to the level of sincerity shown by the tenderers, the last two provide the leverage needed to control the first two. Tenders force the tenderers to be sincere. And tenders can be made as transparent as possible for fairness, which is also in control of the tenderee.
So, while the govt wanted IAF to buy older jets, the IAF opted for the tender route for tech that matters more to them. They don't fear the PLAAF as much as people think they should. LCA Mk1A acts as a decent bridge between the MKI and the Rafale F5, while the F3Rs provide sufficient deterrence.
"MMRCA was over a decade old & no longer relevant." - What this means is MMRCA's configuration was created in 2005-07, so it was no longer relevant in 2018 or 2024-25. The fact that the jets are the same is irrelevant. What's relevant is the avionics carried. Now we have learned that Rafale F5 will not only have completely new avionics, but also a new engine. And of course a new drone. Had the IAF decided to follow what GoI or CDS Rawat wanted, they would have been stuck with the current block. The new avionics, engine and drone push Rafale closer to 6th gen than F3R.
So if that has to be restated for simpler minds, it's basically saying Rafale F3/F3R is no longer relevant so the IAF needs a new tender for next gen versions of the same aircraft. Similarly, the Mig-35 of today is of a different configuration than the one that participated in MMRCA. Typhoon is now in a Tranche 4B configuration.
It takes just 10 years to introduce new technologies, which is why the IAF had planned for MKI (2000), MMRCA (2010), FGFA (2020) and AMCA (2030) in 10-year intervals. There was an old 6th gen program (2040) planned too (JV or import). MRFA takes that into account.
The IAF's interest in a tender had nothing to do with 56" or Joker. Both SE and TE MIIs were supposed to be tenders, and this was decided even before the Rafale deal was signed. Considering MRFA RFI was released in 2018, it most likely began in 2015 itself, after MMRCA was officially junked.
Now comes the question of just buying the Rafale via GTG like the UAE did. This gives us four problems. One, the IAF has reason enough to fear downgrades, especially downgrades that can later be sold as upgrades. Competition forces the OEMs to disclose more of their tech. For example, if we go through with a GTG deal right away, then Dassault could offer a radar with 200 km range, and offer the actual range of 250 km as a paid software upgrade. This is less likely via tender, where the IAF will value jets that surpass requirements.
Two, the IAF doesn't know what else the French have developed. A tender will force Dassault to show more of the cards in their hands due to fear of the competition showing off equal or better tech. The higher the requirements, the more difficult it becomes for the less advanced ones to compete. For example, if all OEMs have cognitive EW, then Dassault will have to show off more advanced modes than their competitors, even stuff they had not planned to show.
Three, the IAF doesn't know what else is out there. Other OEMs know what Rafale's coming with and they will have to showcase technologies they think people in France haven't thought of yet. Similarly, the French will have to reciprocate.
Four, without a competition Dassault can quote any amount they want.
Only tenders give you the luxury of setting your own rules. While the first two problems are subject to the level of sincerity shown by the tenderers, the last two provide the leverage needed to control the first two. Tenders force the tenderers to be sincere. And tenders can be made as transparent as possible for fairness, which is also in control of the tenderee.
So, while the govt wanted IAF to buy older jets, the IAF opted for the tender route for tech that matters more to them. They don't fear the PLAAF as much as people think they should. LCA Mk1A acts as a decent bridge between the MKI and the Rafale F5, while the F3Rs provide sufficient deterrence.
What about J-20 vs Rafale ? If the J-16 is such a formidable opponent according to you how do you think the Rafale would survive an encounter with the J-20 ?
Do remember you're up against this piece of outstanding logic:
Su-57 > J-20 > F-35
F-35 > Rafale
But ..Rafale > J-20 .
@Rajput Lion
Su 57=Rafale=F-35>J20 J 20 is not a fifth-generation fighter. It has no fifth-generation stuff and can be detected from a long distance. Its engine is inferior, its Radar is inferior, Its weapon Package is inferior.
Watching the next election, there is no doubt that Modi has completed his image building, and there are many admirers,
Modi's recent economic performance is hardly very good, his economic strategy is not at all like China, he has adopted a model similar to South Korea and Turkey, using the whole country to support a few big chaebol, and he is not like South Korea's export as the core, but large-scale infrastructure construction as traction, more similar to Turkey. But Turkey still earns foreign exchange by exporting a lot of goods to Europe, while India is still a net deficit country, and its biggest source of foreign exchange is still remittances
I personally feel that India's future is more like Turkey's
Modi's biggest industrial achievement is bringing in Taiwan's Foxconn, which is, after all, a highly labor-intensive industry
Electronics exports are also the fastest
Last edited:
Modi lacks the mandate necessary to bring in major reforms towards labor. It's especially difficult when the leadership in the Opposition are traitors following the dictates of the West.
So his economic measures are towards just a few industries which didn't exist before, because he can still bring in changes there. The electronics industry in particular will be very important for the future. But you are forgetting energy. This is where the West is attacking India the most, they fear the competition. Even China. Both renewables and nuclear.
Modi didn't adopt the chaebol strategy, it's existed since the British era and supported by the Congress through a system called License Raj between 1950 and 1991, and this benefited India's chaebols.
Licence Raj - Wikipedia
Modi represents the opposite of this. He wants to end govt participation in business, but doesn't have the mandate for it.
Government has no business to do business: PM Narendra Modi
Government has no business to do business. Its job is to think about food for the poor, make houses and toilets for them, the prime minister said.
In any case, most of the West is the same. The biggest Western companies pretty much work like chaebols.
In India, this is a particular form of Hinduism that we call the Rafale cult
What I said has been said by American experts too, when they were asked what happens once the F-35 is no longer stealth. Terrain-following is more stealthy than any stealth design made to date.
You do realize the IAF was in the FGFA program and they consider the FGFA to be superior to the J-20, but are still chasing after the Rafale, right?
Our air chief in 2018 said that aircraft like the F-22 are not stealthy, only aircraft like Neuron and B-2 are.
All I see is some Western analysis of Modi's recent comments, and comparisons with other countries, You're talking about things from a long time ago, not Modi's economic modelModi lacks the mandate necessary to bring in major reforms towards labor. It's especially difficult when the leadership in the Opposition are traitors following the dictates of the West.
So his economic measures are towards just a few industries which didn't exist before, because he can still bring in changes there. The electronics industry in particular will be very important for the future. But you are forgetting energy. This is where the West is attacking India the most, they fear the competition. Even China. Both renewables and nuclear.
Modi didn't adopt the chaebol strategy, it's existed since the British era and supported by the Congress through a system called License Raj between 1950 and 1991, and this benefited India's chaebols.
Licence Raj - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Modi represents the opposite of this. He wants to end govt participation in business, but doesn't have the mandate for it.
"Government has no business to do business. Its job is to think about food for the poor, make houses and toilets for them, get them clean drinking water, make health facilities available to them, make roads, to think about the small farmers. This is my priority," Modi said.Government has no business to do business: PM Narendra Modi
Government has no business to do business. Its job is to think about food for the poor, make houses and toilets for them, the prime minister said.www.businesstoday.in
In any case, most of the West is the same. The biggest Western companies pretty much work like chaebols.
The main logic of Rafale religion is Rafale > Su 57 > J20，As For the American F 22 and F 35, they are not invisible
To tell the truth, on the Rafale fighter that small radar, can play a Meteor missile advantage?
Ah ! 8 pm once again & RST invariably describes his own posts in the guise of attacking mine @ so many words , but no substance & all that blah ....
I noticed no further expert comments on the ORBAT of the PLAAF or the total troop numbers of it on which he devoted more than 2 paragraphs in his opening posts on the video.
8 pm , babu bhaiya , 8 pm . Sab 8 pm ka chakkar hain .
So Chinese troops the moment they hit Tibet have already been acclimated without going thru the grind for a fortnight if not more any other force goes through including ours. Must be some real supermen these Chinese.
I must be seeing things . Concealing hyperbaric chambers or locating them underground on a flat featureless plateau called Tibet before they come into contact with the IA , this when they've already been acclimated as per RST when they set foot into Tibet as per the previous paragraph ?!
What have I missed ? 8 pm , babu bhaiya , 8 pm. Sab 8 pm ka chakkar hain !
There he goes once more describing his antics under the garb of critiquing me @there's a huge difference between posting comes to mind .....
Penning smut once again on a family blog aren't we ? @rub the cue tip....
I assume the IA & all the supporting elements like SSB , ITBP , etc will be scratching its behind & sniffing their fingers while the PLA is on the offensive.
Let me quote what RST himself wrote earlier
8 pm , babu bhaiya , 8 pm ! Sab 8 pm ka chakkar hain !!
Sometimes it helps to do a basic check on facts one claims to be talking about before shooting off one's mouth but then this is 8 pm & that too RST talking.
A primer on the short fall in the number of recruits in the IA between 2020-22.
Note : These vacancies are thought to be permanent ones as the GoI has no intention of plugging these gaps . See it as downsizing / right sizing , etc . Whatever incremental increase will happen courtesy Agniveer will happen post 2026. That's how this scheme has been designed.
www.newindianexpress.com
www.thehindu.com
www.timesnownews.com
Also to be noted that under the present disposition RR comes from within the IA , hence all this shortage of personnel within the IA will be reflected in the RR.
The current administration had 10 years within which it could sort out the RR issue designating it the premier CI force , formulating a structure like the Assam Rifles , putting it under the command of the Home Ministry leaving the IA free to do what it is supposed to be doing.
Unfortunately the above , like a lot of things this government has fallen short of , what it should have done , instead of prioritising / concentrating on topics like Agniveer when we haven't even sorted out 1/2.5 fronts soon to be a 3.5 front for our future calculations ought to factor in BD whereas RST is busy farting out his opinions suffering from a bad case of indigestion. 8 pm ?
I could go on but trust the point has been made .
Pray , how are our measly numbers equal to theirs when we'd be firing from reverse slopes meaning ours have to rise above the mountains trace an arc before striking the PLA whereas they're located at heights on a plateau which for obvious reasons greatly assists firing such missiles - the only disadvantage being they're out in the open on a featureless plateau , which we can't exploit for reasons I'd explain as we go on .
Secondly what're our plans to gain parity with them on numbers or even come within its vicinity ? Thirdly , in such scenarios , usually the Air Force plays an active role in sorting out the artillery.
Need I go on on the state of our AF unless RST is suggesting nap of the earth , terrain hugging flying to be done by Jaguar which I'm surprised he didn't bring up in his 8 pm t̶i̶n̶t̶e̶d̶ tainted rant , except that the only terrain hugging the Jaguars would do is hugging mountains while flying on the ascendant with DTs strapped to their flanks and / or the underbelly for the simple reason they're short on endurance. How far will they succeed is anyone's guess which is the reason I suggested some time back out here the Jaguars would make good drones preferably suicide drones.
They will when they are about to undertake their campaign & they'd accomplish it in the less than a fourth of time it takes us. They've more experience & expertise in this as compared to ours. @and yeah , they can build new bases....
Our ER / XR SAMs are under testing which should be certified by users in another 2-3 years . From there to LSP & mass production in the bureaucracy laden system of ours takes a good 5-7 years that too to produce a few hundreds whereas our requirements are in thousands given our obvious handicap vis a vis a lame AF but then do we see similar such movement on the Baraks or Akash ? Of course not .
I won't even bring up the S-400s here . The Chinese have them too except we've a few missiles the Chinese lack but by & large since we both possess them we are well acquainted with its pros & cons , thereby nullifying any advantage that can be accrued.
What about offensive platforms like the Brahmos or the Nirbhay & its various derivatives ? We need them in the thousands too. Do we have them in the thousands ? Of course not . What about war time plans for speedy manufacturing of these & other items ? Do we have plans for them ? Doesn't look like it from what we can glean from public sources .
In fact the only other offensive platform we have - the Shaurya , our geniuses decided to have it under the SFC. I've attached links before of our dhotis & uniforms being so politically correct so as to err on the side of caution & not include such platforms for it may signal to the enemy namely Paxtan & China we're launching a N strike if we opened up our attacks with a salvo of Shaurya or any other similar missile - this when China has a NFU & Paxtan or rather Fauji Foundation loves its own a r s e too much to be getting nuclear with us .
Why do I get the feeling that all the analysts involved in advising our dhotis & uniforms formulating these policies are clones of RST aka 8 pm connoisseurs if not RST himself ?
All we get from RST are hawa baazi or talk in the air much like 8 pm which is one & the same thing with him of Chinese J-20s > F-35s & Chinese ADS = Iranian ADS whereas Indian ADS = Israeli ADS. When asked for demonstrable evidence from credible sources , RST does what he does best - indulge in more R&D - read & dump. I mean when has he linked sources here. Ever .
Yes refuellers . Home work for RST. Instead of sitting on the fat of his a r s e drunk on the fumes of his belching & other sources of those fumes like from his rear also the source of ALL his posts , post 8 pm , draw a straight line on a map from Kunming - Yunnan to Itanagar - Arunachal Pradesh & check the distance. That's where we'd be facing the bulk of the attacks from , on our rear ( pun unintended ) in the NE by PLAAF flying over Myanmar & BD apart from Tibet catching us in between 2 flanks at least as far as the NE goes. Those same bases in Yunnan will also be involved in staging attacks on the ANC island chain. I've written about this last year too.
PLAAF had been repeatedly war gaming these scenarios which is the reason the IN has scrambled to induct the Rafales since our top brass is aware of these developments. Meanwhile how has the AF reacted ? By releasing the RFP in 2026 hoping for a induction in 2035 while the war here could well be over by 2032 latest. RST isn't the only one high on 8 pm . The IAF shares his passion just as the MoD & the PMO while the MEA & the China Study Group attached to the PMO have been high on 8 pm since RST was in liquid form i.e since forever aka even before 8 pm was first distilled .
Then people wonder why do I keep coming to Strat Front . Where else do we get gems like F-35s stealth design is super ceded by J-20s whereas J-20s non stealth advantages are super ceded by the Rafales ?
How come ,asks the novice ? Very zimble - J-20s came after the F-35 ( no puns here , sweetie @Innominate , lest you get the wrong impression . But the Rafales precede the J-20s by more than a decade - novice state ? RST - French build exceptional Fighter Aircrafts. They figured out since theirs wasn't a stealth fighter they'd build a non stealth fighter with non stealthy features which were better , inconceivable & what's more not reproduced by any of its competitors least of all the pesky Chinese , apart from making its non stealth fighter , stealthy . So there !)
Hence 2 years after the equation was first formulated , it still stands :-
F-35 > Rafale
J-20 > F-35
BUT
Rafale > J-20
Hurrah for 8 pm ! 3 cheers everybody ! 8 pm ...hurray , 8 pm ... hurray , 8 pm .... hurray.
Low altitude performance for the Rafales climbing up the Himalayas hugging the terrain as it is climbing will result in more attrition due to terrain & other natural phenomena as opposed to in a fight with the PLAAF.
For Rafales to capitalise on fast turnaround & relatively little maintenance we need them in huge numbers not the 36 we have. The PLAAF already has J-20s in numbers - some 300. The final count as per some estimates including Deino aka Andreas Ruprecht is some 2000 odd nos & they've the mfg prowess to churn it out. Even if they deploy 500 or 250 nos of them which they well can , our goose is cooked .
Then perhaps a lot of other forum members can join RST in 8 pm revelry / drinking to drown ones sorrows , hoping tomorrow will be better than today once conflict breaks out.
I noticed no further expert comments on the ORBAT of the PLAAF or the total troop numbers of it on which he devoted more than 2 paragraphs in his opening posts on the video.
8 pm , babu bhaiya , 8 pm . Sab 8 pm ka chakkar hain .
So Chinese troops the moment they hit Tibet have already been acclimated without going thru the grind for a fortnight if not more any other force goes through including ours. Must be some real supermen these Chinese.
I must be seeing things . Concealing hyperbaric chambers or locating them underground on a flat featureless plateau called Tibet before they come into contact with the IA , this when they've already been acclimated as per RST when they set foot into Tibet as per the previous paragraph ?!
What have I missed ? 8 pm , babu bhaiya , 8 pm. Sab 8 pm ka chakkar hain !
There he goes once more describing his antics under the garb of critiquing me @there's a huge difference between posting comes to mind .....
Penning smut once again on a family blog aren't we ? @rub the cue tip....
I assume the IA & all the supporting elements like SSB , ITBP , etc will be scratching its behind & sniffing their fingers while the PLA is on the offensive.
Let me quote what RST himself wrote earlier
8 pm , babu bhaiya , 8 pm ! Sab 8 pm ka chakkar hain !!
Sometimes it helps to do a basic check on facts one claims to be talking about before shooting off one's mouth but then this is 8 pm & that too RST talking.
A primer on the short fall in the number of recruits in the IA between 2020-22.
Note : These vacancies are thought to be permanent ones as the GoI has no intention of plugging these gaps . See it as downsizing / right sizing , etc . Whatever incremental increase will happen courtesy Agniveer will happen post 2026. That's how this scheme has been designed.
No recruitment in two years has begun 'pinching' the Indian Army
NEW DELHI: It might be the time when the footage of a young and determined Pradeep Mehra pursuing his dream of joining the Indian Army is going viral. But the h
Citing national security, Defence Ministry declines to share details of staff shortage in armed forces
Defence Ministry refuses to disclose armed forces personnel shortage citing national security, sparking concerns over transparency and accountability.
With No Recruitment Since 2020, Indian Army Faces Shortage Of Over 10,000 Nepali Gurkha Soldiers
In 2022, new recruitment scheme Agnipath was announced in the Army but Nepal had raised objections due to which it stopped the entry of Gurkhas from joining the Indian Army., India News, Times Now
Also to be noted that under the present disposition RR comes from within the IA , hence all this shortage of personnel within the IA will be reflected in the RR.
The current administration had 10 years within which it could sort out the RR issue designating it the premier CI force , formulating a structure like the Assam Rifles , putting it under the command of the Home Ministry leaving the IA free to do what it is supposed to be doing.
Unfortunately the above , like a lot of things this government has fallen short of , what it should have done , instead of prioritising / concentrating on topics like Agniveer when we haven't even sorted out 1/2.5 fronts soon to be a 3.5 front for our future calculations ought to factor in BD whereas RST is busy farting out his opinions suffering from a bad case of indigestion. 8 pm ?
I could go on but trust the point has been made .
Pray , how are our measly numbers equal to theirs when we'd be firing from reverse slopes meaning ours have to rise above the mountains trace an arc before striking the PLA whereas they're located at heights on a plateau which for obvious reasons greatly assists firing such missiles - the only disadvantage being they're out in the open on a featureless plateau , which we can't exploit for reasons I'd explain as we go on .
Secondly what're our plans to gain parity with them on numbers or even come within its vicinity ? Thirdly , in such scenarios , usually the Air Force plays an active role in sorting out the artillery.
Need I go on on the state of our AF unless RST is suggesting nap of the earth , terrain hugging flying to be done by Jaguar which I'm surprised he didn't bring up in his 8 pm t̶i̶n̶t̶e̶d̶ tainted rant , except that the only terrain hugging the Jaguars would do is hugging mountains while flying on the ascendant with DTs strapped to their flanks and / or the underbelly for the simple reason they're short on endurance. How far will they succeed is anyone's guess which is the reason I suggested some time back out here the Jaguars would make good drones preferably suicide drones.
They will when they are about to undertake their campaign & they'd accomplish it in the less than a fourth of time it takes us. They've more experience & expertise in this as compared to ours. @and yeah , they can build new bases....
Our ER / XR SAMs are under testing which should be certified by users in another 2-3 years . From there to LSP & mass production in the bureaucracy laden system of ours takes a good 5-7 years that too to produce a few hundreds whereas our requirements are in thousands given our obvious handicap vis a vis a lame AF but then do we see similar such movement on the Baraks or Akash ? Of course not .
I won't even bring up the S-400s here . The Chinese have them too except we've a few missiles the Chinese lack but by & large since we both possess them we are well acquainted with its pros & cons , thereby nullifying any advantage that can be accrued.
What about offensive platforms like the Brahmos or the Nirbhay & its various derivatives ? We need them in the thousands too. Do we have them in the thousands ? Of course not . What about war time plans for speedy manufacturing of these & other items ? Do we have plans for them ? Doesn't look like it from what we can glean from public sources .
In fact the only other offensive platform we have - the Shaurya , our geniuses decided to have it under the SFC. I've attached links before of our dhotis & uniforms being so politically correct so as to err on the side of caution & not include such platforms for it may signal to the enemy namely Paxtan & China we're launching a N strike if we opened up our attacks with a salvo of Shaurya or any other similar missile - this when China has a NFU & Paxtan or rather Fauji Foundation loves its own a r s e too much to be getting nuclear with us .
Why do I get the feeling that all the analysts involved in advising our dhotis & uniforms formulating these policies are clones of RST aka 8 pm connoisseurs if not RST himself ?
All we get from RST are hawa baazi or talk in the air much like 8 pm which is one & the same thing with him of Chinese J-20s > F-35s & Chinese ADS = Iranian ADS whereas Indian ADS = Israeli ADS. When asked for demonstrable evidence from credible sources , RST does what he does best - indulge in more R&D - read & dump. I mean when has he linked sources here. Ever .
Yes refuellers . Home work for RST. Instead of sitting on the fat of his a r s e drunk on the fumes of his belching & other sources of those fumes like from his rear also the source of ALL his posts , post 8 pm , draw a straight line on a map from Kunming - Yunnan to Itanagar - Arunachal Pradesh & check the distance. That's where we'd be facing the bulk of the attacks from , on our rear ( pun unintended ) in the NE by PLAAF flying over Myanmar & BD apart from Tibet catching us in between 2 flanks at least as far as the NE goes. Those same bases in Yunnan will also be involved in staging attacks on the ANC island chain. I've written about this last year too.
PLAAF had been repeatedly war gaming these scenarios which is the reason the IN has scrambled to induct the Rafales since our top brass is aware of these developments. Meanwhile how has the AF reacted ? By releasing the RFP in 2026 hoping for a induction in 2035 while the war here could well be over by 2032 latest. RST isn't the only one high on 8 pm . The IAF shares his passion just as the MoD & the PMO while the MEA & the China Study Group attached to the PMO have been high on 8 pm since RST was in liquid form i.e since forever aka even before 8 pm was first distilled .
Then people wonder why do I keep coming to Strat Front . Where else do we get gems like F-35s stealth design is super ceded by J-20s whereas J-20s non stealth advantages are super ceded by the Rafales ?
How come ,asks the novice ? Very zimble - J-20s came after the F-35 ( no puns here , sweetie @Innominate , lest you get the wrong impression . But the Rafales precede the J-20s by more than a decade - novice state ? RST - French build exceptional Fighter Aircrafts. They figured out since theirs wasn't a stealth fighter they'd build a non stealth fighter with non stealthy features which were better , inconceivable & what's more not reproduced by any of its competitors least of all the pesky Chinese , apart from making its non stealth fighter , stealthy . So there !)
Hence 2 years after the equation was first formulated , it still stands :-
F-35 > Rafale
J-20 > F-35
BUT
Rafale > J-20
Hurrah for 8 pm ! 3 cheers everybody ! 8 pm ...hurray , 8 pm ... hurray , 8 pm .... hurray.
Low altitude performance for the Rafales climbing up the Himalayas hugging the terrain as it is climbing will result in more attrition due to terrain & other natural phenomena as opposed to in a fight with the PLAAF.
For Rafales to capitalise on fast turnaround & relatively little maintenance we need them in huge numbers not the 36 we have. The PLAAF already has J-20s in numbers - some 300. The final count as per some estimates including Deino aka Andreas Ruprecht is some 2000 odd nos & they've the mfg prowess to churn it out. Even if they deploy 500 or 250 nos of them which they well can , our goose is cooked .
Then perhaps a lot of other forum members can join RST in 8 pm revelry / drinking to drown ones sorrows , hoping tomorrow will be better than today once conflict breaks out.
Is the IAF going to specify M-UMT today , given the RFIs already went out in 2017 based on which the RFPs will be formulated ? See what I mean - more 8 pm stuff.
Will any AF evaluate an FA based on the FA presented them for the trial or will it do so for something prospective ? If the present FA meets their needs whatever follows will be a bonus . If not , why bother ?
I'm not surprised such basics have to explained to RST coz as I've pointed out before he's no experience of working in an MNC or any large OEM in any capacity whatsoever , which is the reason he's totally inexperienced in such matters & only has what one calls armchair knowledge which is the reason he comes up with such gems.
It also follows he's never been part of any techno commercial evaluation process in any role whatsoever.
All the additional requirements apart from the core requirements which in this case happens to be avionics can easily be issued vide a corrigendum / addendum to the main body of the tender which in this case is the RFI since the FAs we're interested in remains the same .
MMRCA was officially scrapped in 2016 the same year we signed a G2G deal with the French government for the Rafales. Once the tender was scrapped & the need urgent , there was no way the entire issue could be expedited without resorting to another tender except by going the G2G route.
If we as ordinary citizens & avid aficionados of all things defence know this as an axiom , how's it the IAF is unaware of it ?
I repeat what I've been alleging earlier . The whole issue stemmed from a distrust between the IAF & the MoD / GoI not necessarily this present dispensation given past experiences where it has been let down & those piece meal procurements could be halted anytime due to exigencies. That's not possible once a tender has been signed & an agreement is in place as that obliges the government of the day to make provisions to earmark funds in advance for the procurement.
However , funds aren't the issue here which RST was claiming upto 2022 , yes that same 2022 & the very same RST in his 8 pm ramblings then , when the expenditure on infrastructure made it clear funds weren't a problem & there wasn't anything which could be done about expediting a tender.
All said & done we're in 2024 , 8 years since the G2G was signed , MMRCA was scrapped & 7 years since the MRFA tender was re released in 2017-18 . How can one explain the delay of 7 years & counting in releasing the RFP ?
Standard feature of all imports. We've to decide what do we prioritise - the equipment itself or the upgraded version. Since we've a paucity of genuine 4.5 Gen FA I know what we should've done. The alternative to it is what RST suggests vs a brain dead procedure oriented bureaucracy who'd want the best deal at the least costs with the time taken to achieve this be damned.
So we could either go in for a piece meal procurement of the Rafales a la Su-30 MKI & then gradually upgrade them at costs similar to what the Mirage 2000s just underwent for a pretty packet too or develop our own or be penny wise & pound foolish by prioritising everything except that which needs be prioritised viz - the time taken for all that elaborate procedure followed by the gestation period between ordering & receiving possession plus training etc .
And I've stated the Rafales for that's what we already have got , that's what the IAF prefers & that's what suits our needs taking everything into consideration which means the entire rigmarole viz the MRFA tender is a huge waste of time for all the parties concerned . As
far as price discovery goes we've already signed a deal for 36 nos with Dassault besides signing another one for 26 nos for the IN shortly.
We've done everything which RST has written about in the MMRCA tender - the entire exercise , the intent behind it & the aftermath can be the subject of multiple theses where RST can & would love to serve as the guide.
Further proof RST hasn't worked a day in a professional set up AT ALL for he doesn't realise the importance of time or give credence to the desperate state the IAF is in for anyone who're involved in such deals even at a micro level will be aware of what I'm getting at without being informed about it.
To repeat myself at the risk of sounding like a broken record - we don't have the luxury of time. Arguably we didn't have it even in 2016 but if there were any doubts 2020 confirmed it . If even after that date we're proceeding as if everything's perfectly normal while the IAF Chief has gone on in his very first press conference to state we'd fight with what we have , an ominous statement harking back to Gen V P Malik in 1999 , exactly 25 years ago , then there's something fundamentally wrong with the way the armed forces & the government are running defence.
Will any AF evaluate an FA based on the FA presented them for the trial or will it do so for something prospective ? If the present FA meets their needs whatever follows will be a bonus . If not , why bother ?
I'm not surprised such basics have to explained to RST coz as I've pointed out before he's no experience of working in an MNC or any large OEM in any capacity whatsoever , which is the reason he's totally inexperienced in such matters & only has what one calls armchair knowledge which is the reason he comes up with such gems.
It also follows he's never been part of any techno commercial evaluation process in any role whatsoever.
All the additional requirements apart from the core requirements which in this case happens to be avionics can easily be issued vide a corrigendum / addendum to the main body of the tender which in this case is the RFI since the FAs we're interested in remains the same .
MMRCA was officially scrapped in 2016 the same year we signed a G2G deal with the French government for the Rafales. Once the tender was scrapped & the need urgent , there was no way the entire issue could be expedited without resorting to another tender except by going the G2G route.
If we as ordinary citizens & avid aficionados of all things defence know this as an axiom , how's it the IAF is unaware of it ?
I repeat what I've been alleging earlier . The whole issue stemmed from a distrust between the IAF & the MoD / GoI not necessarily this present dispensation given past experiences where it has been let down & those piece meal procurements could be halted anytime due to exigencies. That's not possible once a tender has been signed & an agreement is in place as that obliges the government of the day to make provisions to earmark funds in advance for the procurement.
However , funds aren't the issue here which RST was claiming upto 2022 , yes that same 2022 & the very same RST in his 8 pm ramblings then , when the expenditure on infrastructure made it clear funds weren't a problem & there wasn't anything which could be done about expediting a tender.
All said & done we're in 2024 , 8 years since the G2G was signed , MMRCA was scrapped & 7 years since the MRFA tender was re released in 2017-18 . How can one explain the delay of 7 years & counting in releasing the RFP ?
Standard feature of all imports. We've to decide what do we prioritise - the equipment itself or the upgraded version. Since we've a paucity of genuine 4.5 Gen FA I know what we should've done. The alternative to it is what RST suggests vs a brain dead procedure oriented bureaucracy who'd want the best deal at the least costs with the time taken to achieve this be damned.
So we could either go in for a piece meal procurement of the Rafales a la Su-30 MKI & then gradually upgrade them at costs similar to what the Mirage 2000s just underwent for a pretty packet too or develop our own or be penny wise & pound foolish by prioritising everything except that which needs be prioritised viz - the time taken for all that elaborate procedure followed by the gestation period between ordering & receiving possession plus training etc .
And I've stated the Rafales for that's what we already have got , that's what the IAF prefers & that's what suits our needs taking everything into consideration which means the entire rigmarole viz the MRFA tender is a huge waste of time for all the parties concerned . As
far as price discovery goes we've already signed a deal for 36 nos with Dassault besides signing another one for 26 nos for the IN shortly.
We've done everything which RST has written about in the MMRCA tender - the entire exercise , the intent behind it & the aftermath can be the subject of multiple theses where RST can & would love to serve as the guide.
Further proof RST hasn't worked a day in a professional set up AT ALL for he doesn't realise the importance of time or give credence to the desperate state the IAF is in for anyone who're involved in such deals even at a micro level will be aware of what I'm getting at without being informed about it.
To repeat myself at the risk of sounding like a broken record - we don't have the luxury of time. Arguably we didn't have it even in 2016 but if there were any doubts 2020 confirmed it . If even after that date we're proceeding as if everything's perfectly normal while the IAF Chief has gone on in his very first press conference to state we'd fight with what we have , an ominous statement harking back to Gen V P Malik in 1999 , exactly 25 years ago , then there's something fundamentally wrong with the way the armed forces & the government are running defence.
Better than the Mao cult of the Han don't you agree where your parents & grand parents may have eaten your great grand parents to survive the famines of the 5 sparrows campaign & the great leap forward or your parents sold out your grand parents to the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution for being counter revolutionaries while swearing on the little red book of great helmsman 1.0 , in order to survive.In India, this is a particular form of Hinduism that we call the Rafale cult
Wonderful people the Han . If they can sell their own without batting an eyelid why would they be sparing anybody else. This is what happens when a civilization starts destroying that which made it great for 3000 years namely Confucianism & take up materialism to the extent where it shuns its own heritage & Han China's nothing but a jungle now where ethics doesn't matter only might does & getting rich at any cost.
That doesn't even make sense.
It's about specifics, not generalizations. For example, while the Su-57 and J-20 have superior range, the Rafale has superior turnaround time. After all, that is the main difference between heavy and light jets.
A Rafale flying from 100 km to a battlefield and can be rearmed in just 10 minutes and sent back into the air in 15 minutes. It can fly to the combat zone in another 7.5 minutes, drop its load, fly back in 7.5 minutes, use up less than an hour to land, rearm, and fly again. So from 100 km it can conduct a full mission cycle in significantly less than 2 hours. So, theoretically, in a 12-hour period, it can fly at least 10 times at the minimum. Israeli F-15s are known to have conducted as many as 7 sorties a day. Plus the Rafale can sustain this momentum for many weeks. Su-57 and J-20 cannot do that.
With terrain-following, the Rafale can fly in low enough to be undectectable to radars until the last moment. Typically, the Rafale would like to fire its weapons before it's detected. Its aerodynamics has been designed for such a role.
The entire purpose of the Rafale is to fly into enemy territory undetected, bomb them, and fly out undetected, and the French have demonstrated this in Red Flag exercises with M2000 against American aggressor forces.
There is a huge difference between stealth and invisibile. All the air chief said is aircraft like F-22, F-35, Su-57, and J-20 are not stealthy enough to be called stealth aircraft in comparison to Neuron and B-2. And in terms of stealth, the Su-57 is more stealthy than the J-20. Evidently, the Su-57 has better airframe shaping than the J-20.
The current radar exceeds the range of the F-35's radar. And the upcoming Rafale uses a new gen architecture.
When Modi signed for 36 Rafale in 2015, he was hailed as a pragmatic decision-maker who knew how to cut through red tape.
Now, almost 10 years later, almost all our key acquisition programs from SSK to MRFA are stalled and there's no clear direction coming from the top leadership.
The IAF is forced to flog a dead horse that's the MiG-21 (even the miserably old Alouette) and scavenge for used M-2000s and MiG-29s around the world.
What's the most jarring is that the IAF brass is openly stating they have 'no Plan B' in the face of sustained psyops by our slit-eyed Eastern neighbors.
With the conventionional military balance so one-sided, India needs to move away from its NFU stance now. We're doing ourselves no favors by sticking to this holier-than-thou nuclear weapons policy.
Now, almost 10 years later, almost all our key acquisition programs from SSK to MRFA are stalled and there's no clear direction coming from the top leadership.
The IAF is forced to flog a dead horse that's the MiG-21 (even the miserably old Alouette) and scavenge for used M-2000s and MiG-29s around the world.
What's the most jarring is that the IAF brass is openly stating they have 'no Plan B' in the face of sustained psyops by our slit-eyed Eastern neighbors.
With the conventionional military balance so one-sided, India needs to move away from its NFU stance now. We're doing ourselves no favors by sticking to this holier-than-thou nuclear weapons policy.
Looks like Ignorants failed to use the chalk again. And what's with this 8 pm fetish? Projection much?
Plains deployed Chinese troops have to undergo acclimatization long before they enter Tibet.
This is called a topography map. It shows plains, deserts and elevations. The brown and green bits are where the PLAGF is located. And the white bit is what we call Tibet.
Now to enter the white bit from the green/brown bit, the troops have to acclimatize. But you can see that due to the distance involved, the brown bit is really, really far away from the Indian border. Which means the Chinese troops have to acclimatize long before they enter the white bit. And once acclimatized, they need to travel hundreds of kms before getting to the Indian border. Due to this distance, it's very difficult for India to collect intelligence on how many Chinese troops have been acclimatized. And in case the Chinese have decided to invade India, you can very easily assume that they can secretly acclimatize a lot of troops long before detection.
Had the cue tip felt resistance, all this would have looked elementary without needing an explanation. But this proves how Ignorants requires constant spoonfeeding even in his old age.
Even after acclimatization, hyperbaric chambers are still required inside Tibet so troops are not tired all the time and to protect them from altitude sickness which even trained mountaineers experience. It's also necessary when troops fall sick or get injured. And another example of the cue tip failing to feel resistance.
These are not concepts that need to be explained, they need to be elementary by now.
I have no clue what he means by SSB and ITBP, all these come under the moniker "border guards" and has already been addressed.
Agnipath is starting slow but will easily climb up to fill troop shortages.
www.thehindu.com
The Agnipath scheme's overall intake is capped at 1.75 lakh until 2026. The intake is planned to increase from 46,000 annually in the first four years to 90,000 in the fifth year and 1,25,000 from the sixth year.
So 46000 until the system is fleshed out as they wait for the first Agniveer to get pushed out of service. This will tell them whether they need to keep 25% or more. Then eventually increase to 125000.
25% of 125k gives 31250 and 35% gives 43750. That's pretty much what the IA used to regularly recruit. And it's set to climb even higher than 125k over the years.
www.dnaindia.com
Speaking with leading daily, The Times of India, Lieutenant General BS Raju said, "The number of recruitments will be increased every year under this scheme. This year 40,000 personnel will be included in it. By the seventh and eighth year, its number will reach 1.2 lakh. Whereas in the tenth and eleventh year this number will reach 1.6 lakhs."
So the aim within the decade is actually 160k. That's 40k at 25% and 56k at 35%.
This scheme will allow militarized patriots to enter society, so a highly trained and experienced militia force can be raised very quickly to deal with Pakistani sleeper cells composed of you-know-whos and you-know-whats hidden inside India.
Anyway plugging troop shortages is not a big deal. The IA has a two-front war strength. And a two-front war is extremely unlikely at this time. We have more troops than the Chinese for mountain warfare. All of this is supposed to be elementary knowledge.
Both sides' troops are at co-altitude. We have localized superiorty in the heights. Meaning, we are perched up on higher locations or are at least at co-altitude in pretty much most areas. We are marginally lower in only a few areas, but that's not reverse slope, just an inclined gradient. And we can make use to terrain to gain an advantage, like we did in Galwan, where our gradient is lower but we climbed up the nearby hills to make up for it.
We have more artillery. Too bad ATHOS didn't work out or we would have had a significant superiority right off the bat. And our aircraft can deliver more payload and sorties than theirs. Our helicopters can do the same. Jaguar is not suitable for mountain ops, but LCA, M2000 and Rafale will be in the future, primarily LCAs. When it comes to indirect fire, they are not exactly in a good position. Or at least when all our systems are delivered to some degree. Especially LCA and ATHOS.
Our SAMs are a step higher in terms of advancement. We have more S-400s. But at the same time, our SAMs are mostly PESA and AESA radar with active seekers. MRSAM is currently the most advanced SAM in the world. Akash Mk2 and XRSAM will give us as much or more capabilities than that pretty soon. And our missiles are composed of more modern aerodynamic designs, smaller, sleeker, with more agility. Chinese SAMs are mostly composed of old Soviet designs, they are big, lumbering and mostly semi-active. Even their new SAMs with active seekers are still based on old missile designs, like Akash Mk1A/P. Akash Mk1 is our least capable SAM among new inductions and is still more capable than most of the Chinese SAMs. India's BMD is superior to what Israel currently possesses, since what we use are next gen versions of what the Israelis have deployed, which in turn means it's more advanced than the Chinese IADS. A large component of Chinese SAMs are actually quite outdated and require replacement.
Refuellers, lol. It's not gonna stop our aircraft from conducting CAS or interdiction missions. If it can't stop CAS and interdiction, then it's useless. What PLAAF needs is turnaround time, not long range. Sure they can conduct some long range strike missions from other bases in the hinterland, but it's of little use over Tibet. You can't expect jets taking off from Beijing to stop an LCA bombing troops from 70 km away at the LAC. Basically, to fight India, they need to make their aircraft refueller-free. Refuellers are much more useful to the Americans against China and even they understand the futility of such a system in a major war, hence the need to design new aircraft that can achieve combat radius of over 2000 km.
Refuellers can become a gamechanger if aircraft can also be rearmed in the air. But with just refuelling in a small battlefield like Tibet, it's impractical. Primarily because it wastes too much time to refuel. Some missions require refuellers, but we have sufficient numbers too. So it's not a Chinese-specific advantage. The Chinese need refuellers against the West + allies.
Plus most missions the Chinese can conduct over long range, like bombing ANC, within the next 2 decades, such an attack will only be symbolic, irrelevant to military objectives. The same with attacking India's hinterland. Which is also why we do not need missiles like Shaurya to attack their hinterland. All our military objectives in depth areas are within 1000-1500 kms of our border, so we are developing missiles like 1500 km Brahmos and LR-LACM. Only the Americans are developing capabilities that can sustain a bombing campaign of an enemy's hinterland. Against India for the same purpose, the Chinese need a fully developed navy.
IN's urgency towards inducting Rafale is due to the fact that Mig-29Ks are not suitable for carrier aviation. And it's being bought for deterrence during peacetime, to compete with the lone Chinese carrier they will eventually bring some day into the IOR.
PLAAF numbers are necessary elsewhere, not against India. They don't even have the air bases required to use hundreds of jets, never mind thousands. The Tibetan battlefield is not large enough for thousands of jets. Cue tip resistance is necessary for common sense to activate. Hell, with just some 40 jets total on both sides, the entire Kashmiri air space became crowded in 2019. So that's the limit of what can be done there.
As for our own numbers, we need LCAs ASAP, not Rafales. We have sufficient Rafales for deterrence, we need LCAs for CAS and interdiction. Later on we will need Rafales and drones for deep CAS, deep interdiction and deep strike, but with sufficient technology suitable for the role. Currently that tech does not exist.
The J-20 would have been an insurmountable challenge in 2005, but today it's just another aircraft. Drones are more important, and our main stealth drone is expected to be inducted in large numbers between 2030-35, timed to LCA Mk2 and MKI MLU. Even MRFA.
And as usual Ignorants loves misquoting me or putting words in my mouth, granted due to his own ignorance. The F-35 is superceded by the J-20 due to avionics and performance, not stealth. Stealth isn't enough of a factor here because even the F-22 is less stealthy than the F-35 but supercedes it due to performance even though its avionics are less capable than the F-35's. And here, the J-20 has superior avionics and performance relative to the F-35. Plus the real stealth advantage will come via drones.
So why is the J-20 better than the F-35? Better high-altitude performance. Higher range and payload. Superior avionics and weapons. Can perform strike missions up to a similar level, although not low and fast. And can protect itself.
So why is the F-35 better than the Rafale? It's a way better strike fighter in the low and fast business, even though it needs escorts sometimes. It has superior avionics relative to the Rafale F3R and similar turnaround time and superior maintenance.
So why is the Rafale better than the J-20? It's a better strike fighter in the low and fast business, and can also perform well at high altitude. And it can protect itself. So, unlike the F-35, it has all the qualities of the J-20. Even though avionics are inferior, it's sufficient to deal with the J-20. And its other advantages like low maintenance and turnaround times push it ahead, 'cause 1 Rafale can do the job of 2 or 3 J-20s in our environment. The J-20 is too over-spec'd for a fight in the Himalayas. It was designed to fight the Japanese and Americans over the Pacific, or the Russians in Manchuria and Siberia. Or it has to waste time flying in from outside Tibet, and that's 1000+ km from the border versus the Rafale from 100-150 km away. There's hardware and software maturity too.
Plains deployed Chinese troops have to undergo acclimatization long before they enter Tibet.
This is called a topography map. It shows plains, deserts and elevations. The brown and green bits are where the PLAGF is located. And the white bit is what we call Tibet.
Now to enter the white bit from the green/brown bit, the troops have to acclimatize. But you can see that due to the distance involved, the brown bit is really, really far away from the Indian border. Which means the Chinese troops have to acclimatize long before they enter the white bit. And once acclimatized, they need to travel hundreds of kms before getting to the Indian border. Due to this distance, it's very difficult for India to collect intelligence on how many Chinese troops have been acclimatized. And in case the Chinese have decided to invade India, you can very easily assume that they can secretly acclimatize a lot of troops long before detection.
Had the cue tip felt resistance, all this would have looked elementary without needing an explanation. But this proves how Ignorants requires constant spoonfeeding even in his old age.
Even after acclimatization, hyperbaric chambers are still required inside Tibet so troops are not tired all the time and to protect them from altitude sickness which even trained mountaineers experience. It's also necessary when troops fall sick or get injured. And another example of the cue tip failing to feel resistance.
These are not concepts that need to be explained, they need to be elementary by now.
I have no clue what he means by SSB and ITBP, all these come under the moniker "border guards" and has already been addressed.
Agnipath is starting slow but will easily climb up to fill troop shortages.
Army plans 96 recruitment rallies for Agniveers this year
Army recruitment rallies nationwide, including for women Agniveers, with online entrance exams and increased intake under Agnipath scheme.
So 46000 until the system is fleshed out as they wait for the first Agniveer to get pushed out of service. This will tell them whether they need to keep 25% or more. Then eventually increase to 125000.
25% of 125k gives 31250 and 35% gives 43750. That's pretty much what the IA used to regularly recruit. And it's set to climb even higher than 125k over the years.
By 2032, 50% Agniveer in Army, 1.5 lakh recruitments every year: Vice Chief of Army Staff BS Raju
Vice Chief of Army Staff Lt General BS Raju has said that by 2030-32, half of the 12 lakh army personnel will be 'Agniveer' through Agnipath scheme.
So the aim within the decade is actually 160k. That's 40k at 25% and 56k at 35%.
This scheme will allow militarized patriots to enter society, so a highly trained and experienced militia force can be raised very quickly to deal with Pakistani sleeper cells composed of you-know-whos and you-know-whats hidden inside India.
Anyway plugging troop shortages is not a big deal. The IA has a two-front war strength. And a two-front war is extremely unlikely at this time. We have more troops than the Chinese for mountain warfare. All of this is supposed to be elementary knowledge.
Both sides' troops are at co-altitude. We have localized superiorty in the heights. Meaning, we are perched up on higher locations or are at least at co-altitude in pretty much most areas. We are marginally lower in only a few areas, but that's not reverse slope, just an inclined gradient. And we can make use to terrain to gain an advantage, like we did in Galwan, where our gradient is lower but we climbed up the nearby hills to make up for it.
We have more artillery. Too bad ATHOS didn't work out or we would have had a significant superiority right off the bat. And our aircraft can deliver more payload and sorties than theirs. Our helicopters can do the same. Jaguar is not suitable for mountain ops, but LCA, M2000 and Rafale will be in the future, primarily LCAs. When it comes to indirect fire, they are not exactly in a good position. Or at least when all our systems are delivered to some degree. Especially LCA and ATHOS.
Our SAMs are a step higher in terms of advancement. We have more S-400s. But at the same time, our SAMs are mostly PESA and AESA radar with active seekers. MRSAM is currently the most advanced SAM in the world. Akash Mk2 and XRSAM will give us as much or more capabilities than that pretty soon. And our missiles are composed of more modern aerodynamic designs, smaller, sleeker, with more agility. Chinese SAMs are mostly composed of old Soviet designs, they are big, lumbering and mostly semi-active. Even their new SAMs with active seekers are still based on old missile designs, like Akash Mk1A/P. Akash Mk1 is our least capable SAM among new inductions and is still more capable than most of the Chinese SAMs. India's BMD is superior to what Israel currently possesses, since what we use are next gen versions of what the Israelis have deployed, which in turn means it's more advanced than the Chinese IADS. A large component of Chinese SAMs are actually quite outdated and require replacement.
Refuellers, lol. It's not gonna stop our aircraft from conducting CAS or interdiction missions. If it can't stop CAS and interdiction, then it's useless. What PLAAF needs is turnaround time, not long range. Sure they can conduct some long range strike missions from other bases in the hinterland, but it's of little use over Tibet. You can't expect jets taking off from Beijing to stop an LCA bombing troops from 70 km away at the LAC. Basically, to fight India, they need to make their aircraft refueller-free. Refuellers are much more useful to the Americans against China and even they understand the futility of such a system in a major war, hence the need to design new aircraft that can achieve combat radius of over 2000 km.
Refuellers can become a gamechanger if aircraft can also be rearmed in the air. But with just refuelling in a small battlefield like Tibet, it's impractical. Primarily because it wastes too much time to refuel. Some missions require refuellers, but we have sufficient numbers too. So it's not a Chinese-specific advantage. The Chinese need refuellers against the West + allies.
Plus most missions the Chinese can conduct over long range, like bombing ANC, within the next 2 decades, such an attack will only be symbolic, irrelevant to military objectives. The same with attacking India's hinterland. Which is also why we do not need missiles like Shaurya to attack their hinterland. All our military objectives in depth areas are within 1000-1500 kms of our border, so we are developing missiles like 1500 km Brahmos and LR-LACM. Only the Americans are developing capabilities that can sustain a bombing campaign of an enemy's hinterland. Against India for the same purpose, the Chinese need a fully developed navy.
IN's urgency towards inducting Rafale is due to the fact that Mig-29Ks are not suitable for carrier aviation. And it's being bought for deterrence during peacetime, to compete with the lone Chinese carrier they will eventually bring some day into the IOR.
PLAAF numbers are necessary elsewhere, not against India. They don't even have the air bases required to use hundreds of jets, never mind thousands. The Tibetan battlefield is not large enough for thousands of jets. Cue tip resistance is necessary for common sense to activate. Hell, with just some 40 jets total on both sides, the entire Kashmiri air space became crowded in 2019. So that's the limit of what can be done there.
As for our own numbers, we need LCAs ASAP, not Rafales. We have sufficient Rafales for deterrence, we need LCAs for CAS and interdiction. Later on we will need Rafales and drones for deep CAS, deep interdiction and deep strike, but with sufficient technology suitable for the role. Currently that tech does not exist.
The J-20 would have been an insurmountable challenge in 2005, but today it's just another aircraft. Drones are more important, and our main stealth drone is expected to be inducted in large numbers between 2030-35, timed to LCA Mk2 and MKI MLU. Even MRFA.
And as usual Ignorants loves misquoting me or putting words in my mouth, granted due to his own ignorance. The F-35 is superceded by the J-20 due to avionics and performance, not stealth. Stealth isn't enough of a factor here because even the F-22 is less stealthy than the F-35 but supercedes it due to performance even though its avionics are less capable than the F-35's. And here, the J-20 has superior avionics and performance relative to the F-35. Plus the real stealth advantage will come via drones.
So why is the J-20 better than the F-35? Better high-altitude performance. Higher range and payload. Superior avionics and weapons. Can perform strike missions up to a similar level, although not low and fast. And can protect itself.
So why is the F-35 better than the Rafale? It's a way better strike fighter in the low and fast business, even though it needs escorts sometimes. It has superior avionics relative to the Rafale F3R and similar turnaround time and superior maintenance.
So why is the Rafale better than the J-20? It's a better strike fighter in the low and fast business, and can also perform well at high altitude. And it can protect itself. So, unlike the F-35, it has all the qualities of the J-20. Even though avionics are inferior, it's sufficient to deal with the J-20. And its other advantages like low maintenance and turnaround times push it ahead, 'cause 1 Rafale can do the job of 2 or 3 J-20s in our environment. The J-20 is too over-spec'd for a fight in the Himalayas. It was designed to fight the Japanese and Americans over the Pacific, or the Russians in Manchuria and Siberia. Or it has to waste time flying in from outside Tibet, and that's 1000+ km from the border versus the Rafale from 100-150 km away. There's hardware and software maturity too.
And why Ignorants will always remain Ignorants. "Whatever follows" gets bonus points for the T1 rank. And T1 gets 10% additional price advantage in the tender. The IAF sets requirements, but would like aircraft better than what's been set.
The MRFA tender wasn't re-released in 2018, it's yet to be released. The specs alone were finalized only in 2022.
Yes, money's not a problem. Look at all the stuff the IA and IN have ordered, never mind the IAF. SSNs anyone?
Aircraft cannot be upgraded piecemeal. Our procurement system doesn't allow it.
IAF wants next gen Rafales, not F3R or F4. They can't be upgraded to F5 properly anyway. It needs a new engine to boot.
The IAF's getting LCAs to bridge the gap. Older Rafales are of no use without F5 upgrades. I had stated this half a decade ago. We need Rafale with a new radar and EW suite to properly compete with Chinese J-20s and upcoming next gen aircraft. And this happens to be the F5, and it's supposed to be ready around 2030.
Funny how I am the supposedly inexeprienced one, but the system is following everything I have said.