Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates

Probably means they are going to stay and hold the position, meaning there's not going to be a fight.

Seems they don't have the guts to fire the first shot. IA should take full advantage of this. As the saying goes, "a barking dog 🐶 seldom bites".
Keep pushing the Chinese and keep grabbing land. We shall see what's the threshold of these jokers are.
 
There's no Nirbhay ever inducted in our Armed Forces, no user-trials ever conducted, either.

So, what real options do we have - except a prohibitively expensive Brahmos - when it comes to launching barrages & sustained volleys over long-ranges - in excess of 90 kms ?

We need an cost-effective option, beyond extremely riskier one likes IAF, where platform & especially personnel costs are almost irreparable losses in short-term @Milspec @randomradio

Fighter jets. There's nothing more cost effective or reliable than fighter jets beyond the range of artillery.
Seems they don't have the guts to fire the first shot. IA should take full advantage of this. As the saying goes, "a barking dog 🐶 seldom bites".
Keep pushing the Chinese and keep grabbing land. We shall see what's the threshold of these jokers are.

I don't think we plan to do anything more than what's already done. It's China's move now.
 
There were some reports/rumor once that reaction has been achieved in lab environment. But you still need to make a proper bomb out of it. Not sure if it has been done


must be something classified like KALI. I heard there are labs under sea some distance from mumbai seashore where they work on such things. That area is protected by navy.
KALI is not a bomb
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Defc0n
Fighter jets. There's nothing more cost effective or reliable than fighter jets beyond the range of artillery.


I don't think we plan to do anything more than what's already done. It's China's move now.

Yes, that's the justification offered in favour of Aircraft Carriers, over having Arsenal-class DDG's - that delivering munitions via Aircrafts is soo cost-effective.

However, we shouldn't miss the fact that we are barely a 28 fighter-squadron IAF, while PAF alone fields close to 18 squadrons (?), & combined with our arch-nemesis, PLAAF & PAF hold an unbeatable numerical superiority over us.

PLAAF Flanker rip-off's alone outnumber our IAF by a significant measure.

Even if they cannot commit all to WTC, committing our IAF towards relentless Ground-Strikes in a highly-defended airspace controlled by Chinks isn't the sanest of strategy.

Loss of IAF platforms in an intense war would be irreplaceable in short-term. As everyone is aware, Pilot-training involves years & years of flying & a lot more. I know. I have failed PABT.

That's why cruise-missiles & longer-ranged guided rockets. There is no substitute. IAF not in the least, which should initially, rather focus on Air-dominance & CAP's.

If all bodes well, then ground-strikes barrages can definitely be sustained. Not before completely knocking-off hostile Air-Defence with subsonic CM's, which we don't have in numbers.

So, we choose to send our pilots the harm's way. Avoidable .................by better planning & threat-based procurement.
 
Yes, that's the justification offered in favour of Aircraft Carriers, over having Arsenal-class DDG's - that delivering munitions via Aircrafts is soo cost-effective.

However, we shouldn't miss the fact that we are barely a 28 fighter-squadron IAF, while PAF alone fields close to 18 squadrons (?), & combined with our arch-nemesis, PLAAF & PAF hold an unbeatable numerical superiority over us.

PLAAF Flanker rip-off's alone outnumber our IAF by a significant measure.

Even if they cannot commit all to WTC, committing our IAF towards relentless Ground-Strikes in a highly-defended airspace controlled by Chinks isn't the sanest of strategy.

Loss of IAF platforms in an intense war would be irreplaceable in short-term. As everyone is aware, Pilot-training involves years & years of flying & a lot more. I know. I have failed PABT.

That's why cruise-missiles & longer-ranged guided rockets. There is no substitute. IAF not in the least, which should initially, rather focus on Air-dominance & CAP's.

If all bodes well, then ground-strikes barrages can definitely be sustained. Not before completely knocking-off hostile Air-Defence with subsonic CM's, which we don't have in numbers.

So, we choose to send our pilots the harm's way. Avoidable .................by better planning & threat-based procurement.

Why have we ignored on those?
Especially cruise missile.
Urrgh Nirbhaya got us in tough spot.

Then only available option is tactical missiles .

Prahar / Pragati is also still not inducted.
Long range rocket - Pinaka Mk2 with 120 km range would be the next in line I guess.

Hope the next iteration of Nirbhay is made faster .
Manik engine is ready?

_------------++------

Why are we not inducting guided precision rockets in helicopters ?
Money don't seem to be main reason, since we love to use Excalibur rounds.

-_-----------------


Why have we Not placed orders for LCAmk1A, LCH , LUH yet
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JustCurious
Discussion going on for long how to take out Chinese Airfields - Ballistic missiles, Brahmos etc.
There are special long range glide weapons for this kind of job like SAAW etc SEAD operations, inserting special operations troops to name a few.
Then i wonder what B2 Stealth Bomber special division recently setup by USA in Diego Garcia doing in Indian Ocean, after all South China sea is more easily accessible via Australia for B2 & tons of islands USA control in that region. hope you get my hint
Besides if all hell breaks lose, with the kind of love for China by rest of world recently coming to light, am sure some special weapons be immediately & urgently available with technicians to jugar fix it to integrate with local systems.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JustCurious
PLAAF Flanker rip-off's alone outnumber our IAF by a significant measure.

The main question, which Google Maps has not yet answered, is the current infrastructure buildup in the airbases of Hotan, Ngari and even Shigatse. If hardened shelters have not yet been built, then they are not at all prepared to fight in the air.

That's why cruise-missiles & longer-ranged guided rockets.

Fighter jets are actually the main option against the Chinese. Firing cheap cruise missiles without a complex SEAD/DEAD plan involving aircraft will fail spectacularly. The Chinese air defences are far more advanced and numerous than what the USAF have. In fact, the US admit to their failure in matching their buildup. The longer the range you fire your missile from, the greater is the possibility of failure, due to the simple reason that a CM cannot actively protect itself. At best, you can sneak some in while your fighter jets are engaging their fighter jets and AD.

Cheap cruise missiles like the Tomahawk are not going to penetrate their defences on their own. We are in need of much more advanced missiles with a lot of focus on stealth and survivability (including speed), like the SCALP, JASSM/JASSM-ER, the Brahmos family etc.

Some argue that you can use a combination of ECM and saturation attacks. It used to be a good argument back in the 90s and 2000s, and successfully put to use, but that's practically not feasible now considering modern AESA radars can track and engage far more targets at once, especially with all the automation and networking.

Our plan to breach air defences is not by using cheap GLCMs like the Tomahawk, but expensive ALCMs, like SCALP, Brahmos-A, KH-31 etc, missiles that are actually capable of breaching air defences. Once SEAD/DEAD is successful, then cheap missiles like the Tomahawk will be needed, which is more useful for the army rather than the air force at that point.

So, we choose to send our pilots the harm's way. Avoidable .................by better planning & threat-based procurement.

The USAF is planning to induct 10,000 LRASM and JASSM-ERs. These are expensive missiles. Definitely puts our 216 Brahmos-A to shame. To put things in perspective, look at the sheer size of Russian S-400 inductions: 28 regiments by this year, no idea how many more beyond that. And they have similar quantities of S-300 and Buk. And they will follow that up with dozens of regiments of the S-500. And this is only their air force. And here we are happy with 5 regiments of S-400 or 5 regiments of MRSAM or 4 regiments of Akash etc. You can bet the Chinese are easily much more than the Russians.

So the Chinese, Russians and Americans play at that level. We are not going to get through Chinese defences by throwing money at them at our current level. Until we can play at that level, we have to risk our lives, and we have to risk our fighter jets. Which is why I always say that war is for the rich.