Pralay and Shaurya: Conventional Strike Surface-to-Surface Missiles

[randomradio]

Numerical superiority is not supposed to be across the board, it's localised.

For example, both sides can have 100 people each in 10 groups with 10 in each group. In case you want to go on an offensive, then you mass behind one of your groups, increase numbers by many times and attack at that point. Once your main forces go through, units behind the strike group will then start attacking adjoining enemy groups, while the strike groups attacks the enemy's rear areas or is stopped by their reserves. The enemy will do the same elsewhere. If that's the limit of what each side can do, the war will end. Then they will negotiate, and victory or defeat will be determined by how strategic the newly occupied locations are. But politically, both sides can claim victory, like Pakistan did in 1965.

There's no space for escalation. It's pointless to attack civilian targets or use nukes. Unlike Ukraine, we can respond to their escalation, which is why it's pointless. Even if they do, it doesn't change anything along FEBA, which is also why it's pointless. So the Chinese are more than likely to stick to military targets while cyberattacking civilians. For example, many of these dumbass Chinese phone users will be shocked to find their bank accounts cleaned out one fine morning.

They can't escalate, so their only choice is to make the war more expensive for India via attrition, like Russia is doing. But that in exchange will give India more opportunities to turn the tables. Why? If the Indian defence is frustrating them, it also means they are taking more losses, unlike the Russians. More losses means more opportunities for India. So the more time it takes, the more risky it becomes for them, and at the same time they will be expending way more money than us. Attrition wars are far more affordable as well.

To make matters worse, they can't fight an attrition warfare with the IA, there's a massive gap in experience. If overwhelming firepower doesn't work the first time round (sharp, high-intensity), the first month of the war, then they will have to pack up and leave.

 

[SrNair]

Numerical superiority is not supposed to be across the board, it's localised.

For example, both sides can have 100 people each in 10 groups with 10 in each group. In case you want to go on an offensive, then you mass behind one of your groups, increase numbers by many times and attack at that point. Once your main forces go through, units behind the strike group will then start attacking adjoining enemy groups, while the strike groups attacks the enemy's rear areas or is stopped by their reserves. The enemy will do the same elsewhere. If that's the limit of what each side can do, the war will end. Then they will negotiate, and victory or defeat will be determined by how strategic the newly occupied locations are. But politically, both sides can claim victory, like Pakistan did in 1965.

There's no space for escalation. It's pointless to attack civilian targets or use nukes. Unlike Ukraine, we can respond to their escalation, which is why it's pointless. Even if they do, it doesn't change anything along FEBA, which is also why it's pointless. So the Chinese are more than likely to stick to military targets while cyberattacking civilians. For example, many of these dumbass Chinese phone users will be shocked to find their bank accounts cleaned out one fine morning.

They can't escalate, so their only choice is to make the war more expensive for India via attrition, like Russia is doing. But that in exchange will give India more opportunities to turn the tables. Why? If the Indian defence is frustrating them, it also means they are taking more losses, unlike the Russians. More losses means more opportunities for India. So the more time it takes, the more risky it becomes for them, and at the same time they will be expending way more money than us. Attrition wars are far more affordable as well.

To make matters worse, they can't fight an attrition warfare with the IA, there's a massive gap in experience. If overwhelming firepower doesn't work the first time round (sharp, high-intensity), the first month of the war, then they will have to pack up and leave.

Only if the possibility of war is there.Our priority should be buy more time to modernise and self reliant in defence MIC.If not Chinese can spend 4 to 5 trillion for a war with India and eventually we will effed up.
Forget the West they wont help us .I think our policymakers plans their action after omitting West plans.After the Ukraine debacle it is absolutely sure that they wont help us.West especially Europeans have much anger towards Indians because of our stand

 

[Jaymax]

I repeat anyone seeing this as merely a short sharp high intensity border war is not thinking this one through thoroughly & is way out of his depths.

@Jaymax

You've read Rikhye & plenty of others on this topic . What's your PoV on this ?

You are absolutely right. A conflict in the Himalayas will be a lengthy messy affair.

PLA isnt used to mountain ops leave alone mountain ops gone kinetic. There is no way PLA can even sustain a 3:1 superiority in numbers in a high tempo situation. Its just the way things work, the stress for a green soldier in a combat zone - high stress, anxiety, physical exertion all elevate heart beats and breathing rate - in a low oxygen surrounding.

PLA will have already factored this and their strategy will be to beat us before the IA grabs the PLA by the throat.

Which means they will go for a knock out blow in week 1.

After that everything is as certain as India's monsoon patterns.

 

[randomradio]

Only if the possibility of war is there.Our priority should be buy more time to modernise and self reliant in defence MIC.If not Chinese can spend 4 to 5 trillion for a war with India and eventually we will effed up.

The post already considers war is a possibility within a year or two. We defintiely gotta buy time, but that's not our choice to make.

Forget the West they wont help us .I think our policymakers plans their action after omitting West plans.After the Ukraine debacle it is absolutely sure that they wont help us.West especially Europeans have much anger towards Indians because of our stand

The West will help us the first 3-6 months for sure. By then they will have achieved their objectives.

Our stance on Ukraine doesn't change anything.

 

[_Anonymous_]

The entire premise of the opening paragraph of # 201 is flawed as though we're still in 1962. The operation will begin with massive multiple missile barrages , cyber attack & waves of PLAAF sorties .

The objective would be to sanitize upto 100 kms from the LAC on the Indian side which would also include our forward as well as main air & army bases including logistical bases apart from the usual targets of bridges railroads , any target of strategic or tactical importance etc & they have the capabilities to unleash this kind of fire power .

They've just test fired 130+ ballistic missiles last year (?) . Even if this represents 1-2% of their entire BM arsenal, it can only be imagined what're we looking at by 2030 ( I'd stick to my guns of China prosecuting it's campaign by 2028-30 for reasons I've already detailed earlier, which I won't go into for now for not only would this become an unbearably long thread , it'd derail it) .

This is the nature of beast we've to reckon with & we respond with a DAC approval for 120 Pralays. When will the CCS sanction it, when will the order be released & deliveries expedited , when will we receive the total complement & what will the final numbers be is another topic altogether.

We need the Pranash, Prahaar, Shaurya & Prahar in thousands each apart from the Brahmos & it's various variants & the Brahmos -2 hypersonic missile in numbers as well as the HGV being developed by the DRDO. Add to this our field guns & rockets - guided & unguided of various calibres plus the production base to sustain numbers in war time.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1606222393680068609

Pls note this isn't taking into account their CM or HGV capabilities which is another story altogether. Besides those 130+ BMs tested could be taken to include air, sea land & underwater BMs including strategic & tactical missiles.

Let's come to their air power where by 2030 we're easily looking at 750-1000 5th Gen & 3-4000 4.5 Gen ++ / 4.5 Gen + / 4 Gen + FAs across all theatres. Pls note the details w.r.t platforms & ammo provided will be across all theatres. What're the numbers that will be deployed is anybody's guess.

Then we'd have to contend with their field artillery including guns, guided & unguided rockets. If that's not all there's drone warfare to consider .

The IAF , our fledging rocket force & cyber space command apart from IA will have to contend with this for the first 1-2 weeks maybe more before the actual ground campaign begins.

The ground campaign would still entail staying true to the military axiom of 5:1 -7:1 in mountain warfare just as the PLA did in 1962 when they brought 6-7 divisions or around 80,000 troops vs our 1-2 divisions 25-30, 000 troops.

We're looking at 2-3 lakhs of combined troops of the PLA & associated para militaries along with an equal number of reserves. Don't ask me where did I get the figure from? It's just a guesstimate to tackle rotation & casualties more due to the climactic conditions than to battlefield conditions.

It's around 2030 our Agniveers will be present in substantial numbers as opposed to the situation now where we're up against a largely conscript army which by 2030 would be a war between 2 conscript armies. The only silver lining if any is our reservists would be veterans.

What's being described in #201 are tactics which can & will vary as per varied factors viz location, topography, strength of position, weather, strength of deployable troops , arms & ammo in hand, supply lines, support vide artillery, air , etc.

This is where drone warfare particularly micro & mini swarm drones apart from suicide drones etc play a huge part. This is one field where we can & will match the Chinese provided we get them in substantial numbers as far as both the IA & IAF go especially the forrner.

If we negotiate this phase & thwart their bid to grab territory or are able to secure some of theirs in lieu for what we've lost comes the long grind or what's known as the war of attrition. Mind you the war of attrition would still see those massive missile barrages , relentless sorties & cyber attacks apart from field artillery & drone attack combination.

From here, if we've made it this far, assuming we're in 2nd or 3rd month of the war & if we're still holding up will come the escalation. What form will it take & what role will it play is anyone's guess. This could also involve the navies in substantial roles.

A few things to be noted are :

Our forward & in some cases our main bases are located close to the borders within the 100 kms arbitrary limit I've considered , as something the Chinese will consider as legitimate targets , which though it improves our reaction time also puts these FAs & those bases in harm's way given the proximity to the border (as opposed to bases in our hinterland like Ambala, Kanpur etc which they may not target in the first phase of the war , which I estimate should last anywhere between 1-3 months) .

China faces a different problem in that it's main bases are in the interior like western theatre command Chengdu , Urumqi, etc. Now the dilemma is while we attack Shigatse, Lhasa etc, does Kashgar , Chengdu , Lanzhou etc from where multiple sorties will be launched , become immediate targets or will they be kept for the 2nd stage for if we target them in the initial stage there's a good chance our bases in Northern & Eastern command will come under retaliatory attack . Having said that there's no guarantee if we show restraint, they would.

The old axiom of air warfare from Tibet where FAs take off with half the payload will be overcome by basing substantially more FAs in the hinterland bases compared to the FAs in forward air bases , deployment of huge numbers per sortie, presence of substantial refuelers along with ISR in air , multiple waves where say one set of 50-75 FAs have reached the vicinity of their designated targets, an equal number will be mid way from those same targets refueling in air & an equal number set to take off.

See what I'm getting at . With 36 Rafales as, opposed to say 200 J-20's deployed a loss of their 30 FAs will equal to our 1 Rafale in terms of the pinch felt by PLAAF by way of attrition of their premier platform , assuming that these J-20s perform at least 2 sorties in 24 hrs as opposed to 5 sorties the Rafales undertake.

Then there's the 3-4000 > 5 th Gen FA to contend with of which at least 600- 800 will be with the WTC easily replacable in case of losses thru attrition by diversion from other TCs.

We'd be tackling these with our MKIs & Mirage 2000 along with our MiG-29 - the latter two would be in supporting roles with the heavy lifting done by the MKIs though how effective a supporting role the latter plays is frankly questionable, also assuming all our MKIs are of Super Sukhoi grade hopefully with new engines .

Somebody was narrating dairy tales as opposed to fairy tales of deploying the Jaguars in this environment. We can if we can convert them into UAVs , preferably suicide drones.

IADs aren't being considered here though they'd play a vital role as I'd rate the IADs of both nations at par. If we've the edge in quality they'd have the edge in numbers of SAMs.

If this goes beyond 4-5 months we could see the Chinese targeting industrial , power , defense based works & armed forces bases in the hinterland . The only deterrence to it would be our BMs of > 2000 kms thru which we can retaliate in kind for which we need them in substantial numbers to deter them failing which we pay them back in the same coin with a not a penny more not a penny less policy. Any defiency in numbers or capabilities or production capacity & we're inviting trouble.

If this goes down to a war of attrition of which I've no doubt ( although the time frames may differ, whether more or less I can't say ) this is likely what's it's going to look like.

What're your opinions? I believe I've covered all the points I could think off painting broad strokes.

@Jaymax ; @vstol Jockey

 

[randomradio]

BMs, CMs and FAs can't do much along FEBA. The troops and war materials are either underground or mobile. And there's enough hiding space in the mountains for ammo and other supplies. Mountain warfare is more infantry-heavy, unlike the plains. So it's downright impossible to use standoff capabilities against the IA. Long range fires are meant for use against fixed targets in depth, like C&C nodes, fixed radar stations and IAF bases. Any fighting in the mountain will be a slugfest. Short range massive fires via artillery is much more important than long range fires.

Mountain warfare is a type of war even NATO is incapable of fighting, which they effectively demonstrated against the Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, where airpower was absolutely useless. You find a hole, you have to go in yourself to clear it out.

2:01 to 2:14

There's no HGV on the planet that can help you do the above.

That's what they mean by mountains literally eating away at troops.

As for numerical advantage, only a localised superiority is possible. The Chinese came with 80000 in 1962 because that's the size of the battle area. Things haven't changed since then. And we have even more than that now. First off, numerical advantage needed in the mountains is not 5 or 7:1, it's 9-12:1. We have about 400-450,000 troops, so the Chinese will have to bring in 4-5 million men. Since that's obviously not possible, they will have to rely on local superiority rather than theater-level superiority.

We have 3 divisions in the Ladakh LAC, so the Chinese have to bring in what, 27-36 divisions? Not happening. Even a 5:1 ratio is 15 divisions. Common sense can be applied here.

Pre-modernisation estimates for the PLAGF was 25-30 divisions across the entire front, which is about 250-300k fighting troops. Now it's half that with about 12-24 combat brigades, not counting the military districts, which was common to both eras.

If a war happens within a year or two, the PLAAF cannot bring 200 J-20s to the fight. Even if they did, the jets have old engines and suffer from Tibet physics. So they are largely limited to air defence and limited strikes anyway. Or the alternative is they have to takeoff from far away bases and refuel en route, which goes back to the IAF having local superiority in numbers. Another option is to use longer runways, but that's a luxury. All of China's main bases in Tibet and Xinjiang are within reach of the IAF's long range fires so we can bet the runway will be one of the primary targets.

2 men without an arm each cannot match 1 healthy man. 2 sedans cannot replace a truck. In order to surpass geography, quality is more important. So more jets cannot surpass Tibet physics.

3-4000 > 5 th Gen FA >>> WTF!!! I'm supposed to be the one spinning tales.

Even the Americans with their Digital Series plan expect to build 200 jets every 15-20 years for air superiority and SEAD/DEAD.

The Chinese attacking the Indian hinterland during war is more of a long term threat. In a year or two, or within the decade, it's unlikely. Neither side has the stomach to attack civilian targets. And the Chinese will only invite more sanctions in the process. They first need to achieve the goals they set out to achieve via the Made in China 2025 plan, which has been delayed.

China's main goal will be to teach India a lesson by taking away some land while also training their troops in a real war, all in prepration to attack Taiwan and potentially fight the US. They literally have nothing to gain by escalating the war with India to the point where their own hinterland is attacked before a war with the US. There is absolutely no advantage for China. It quite literally changes nothing on the ground. Common sense can be applied here.

Attacking each others's hinterland requires a far more serious war, and today, neither side is capable of fighting one. For example, the Chinese will need millions of troops to invade India beyond the Himalayas, not merely 2-4 corps. And once they enter the Indian plains, they will need the ability to go on the offensive against 5000+ Indian tanks. So they will have to bring in more tanks than we do, and they don't have that either. It's all common sense.

 

[Jaymax]

What're your opinions? I believe I've covered all the points I could think off painting broad strokes.

@Jaymax ; @vstol Jockey

My 2 cents

China wont want a long war - each day India resists means an extra day the mighty PLA couldnt put down a regional power. It doesnt help with the Global superpower image.

Their opening blow will be take out support infra and impair India's ability to mount and sustain offensive actions. Take out forward supply depots, Command centers, railway junctions, airfields, tunnels etc. This will be followed by limited ground actions in areas where the terrain is friendly and more suited to PLA's strengths.

A mix of cyber attacks to cause widespread confusion throughout the country and break the morale while the defense infra is given a massive pounding.

Within a fortnight, China should open channels for talks with their message being "You had enough?".

They know they cannot prevail in a full war with India, even if Pak steps in. Pak will need massive infusion of cash, fuel and supplies for it to do anything serious.

There is also a decent chance that the west will supply defense items to India like Ukraine even further blunting any Chinese advantages. The west loves wars where it can pump in weapons and get favorable terms in policy and trade and not worry about body bags.

My best guess - China will want a small campaign but will get suckered into a high tech war of attrition forcing it pull more resources from other theaters. Its category A units designated for Taiwan will be untouched - they will anyways be not set up to fight a mountain war.

But the caveat stands - things can swing either way after the first week

 

[_Anonymous_]

I shall forever remain indebted to story teller for acquainting me with the intricacies of mountain warfare . Up until this point I swear I didn't even come across the term .

I Thought I'd clearly spelt out what those missile barrages were supposed to achieve not in a different language . Where exactly did I mention them targeting troops on mountains ?

The 5:1-7:1 ratio was considering the number of small mini micro drones including swarm drones operating at 15000+ altitudes capable of carrying a payload between 5-25 kgs targeting individual or small groups of soldiers to accomplish kills - whether individual or in small groups operating high up in the Mountains that China will bring into play .

Just to clarify so that story teller doesn't run away with his conclusions & spin another yarn , although being a late beginner , this is one area we can match them as well pound for pound.

Further each Indian division consists of 15000 jawans whereas each Chinese division consists of 12000. Our only saving grace is the number of troops in the IA we have at the moment , adept at mountain warfare including the ITBP & SFF. Whether it continues with the Agniveer program come 2030 & onwards I'm not confident . However we'd be better placed with our reservists in this matter.

The numbers I gave was 2-3 lakhs of PLA along with all it's para militias plus an equal number of reservists . I trust story teller is smart enough not to fall for the ruse of downsizing the PLA while quietly diverting all those surplus personnel to PAP , something our planners are using to convince the people at large that if this is how China's going about things why're we not following suit with no MSM defence correspondent worth his salt calling out the selective quoting of facts by the IA , Raksha Mantralaya & GoI in this regard with only a few perceptive amateur expert busybodies quoting western sources on it , doing so on various blogs including Twitter .

I Thought I wrote in fairly plain & simple English that I don't foresee this war to occur in the next 2-3 yrs but around 2030 . See it as 2022 w.r.t Strat Front . That'd help one gain perspective .

Local superiority in numbers means being located in bases close to the LAC or within the arbitrary 100 kms distance from them I wrote about earlier which in turn makes them susceptible to those very same missile barrages I wrote at the very beginning of my previous post , which story teller as usual misconstrued ,as is his wont , into an attack on troops in the mountains & came up with a rather tiresome exposition on mountain warfare .

Can't tell how much of this misconstruing of data is deliberate & how much is involuntary ? The latter condition known by various names afflicts quite a few members out here . Wouldn't be surprised at one more addition to that illustrious list . These various conditions also go hand in hand with spinning dairy & fairy tales . In fact it can be argued these are the underlying causes for spinning those wonderful tales.

3-4000 of purely 4th Gen FA & above . I've provided the break up of > 5th Gen in my previous posts. It's 2-3000 4th Gen FAs & 750-1000 5th Gen & above FAs.

They already have close to 2000 FA & bombers about a fourth of which is < 3rd Gen or in between 3rd & 4th Gen . PLAAF plans to replace all of them & field an exclusive 4th Gen & above force before the decade is out . Another reason why I getting around to that 2030 date .

Besides I hope nobody here's under the illusion that those 500+ J-10s or 100 + J-16 etc including their various variants as of today are going to be static in terms of numbers with no addition ever except for attrition .

I Thought I clearly mentioned targeting of assets sans population centres with missile barrages in the hinterland only after a certain timeframe subject to certain reasons & conditions which I've delineated . Where did I ever talk about an invasion ? I mean I had to literally read my own previous post thrice to see if there was even the slightest hint of it . Turns out there was none . I'm having serious doubts on the comprehension abilities of story teller here . It's either that or post 8 pm euphoria given new year's Eve is around the corner. I sincerely hope it isn't both .

Finally as Jaymax put it well , while the Chinese may well want a limited campaign to achieve limited outcomes namely to teach India a lesson & grab land for which it has to bring such massive force to bear unlike 1962 where even then was a cakewalk for them for I've read accounts of how apart from pockets of resistance ( which the Chinese themselves admiringly spoke of with a sense of awe) even they were surprised by how quickly we collapsed & all this for a force which acquited itself with great credit in WW-2 barely 2 decades ago , worrying facts duly acknowledged by the top brass of the CCP including Mao himself & credit for our dismal performance going to the one & only Nehru & his equally useless Lackey Krishna Menon ( the latter being proof whenever there's a mallu involved in decision making at the highest levels w.r.t China we're screwed. It's something like what's happening in Ukraine - an Irish man in the WH & there's massive trouble with Russia with a deep Ukrainian angle. Something like adding mentos to coke ) the sheer amounts of planning preparation & build up they'd need for this campaign plus the efforts expended in terms of men material & money for just a few peaks & largely unproductive pieces of land in every sense of the words used could well turn out to be a case of getting something more than they bargained for.

HEnce , the digression apart , as the old saying goes , no plan survives first contact with war . Besides , if Modi or whoever occupies his chair , loses he gets disgraced & in all probability loses the next elections. If Xi loses given the way he's concentrated power innhis hands ' the sheer numbers he's offended & interests he's damaged , it'd be unmarked graves for him & his clique. Just to repeat What I've written earlier , sometimes it helps consider what's at stake & the repercussions involved to understand the intensity behind ones actions.

 

[randomradio]

When two sides have the same capabilities, and if some capability does not help in the war effort, then it's very unlikely for it to be put to use. The best example is nukes. And in this context, it's hitting the hinterland. If the Chinese attack on the Indian hinterland serves no purpose in defeating the IA on the ground, then it simply won't be done.

Russia is now attacking Ukrainian infrastructure because it makes sense for them to do it now, 'cause they intend to break the people's will and degrading the UAF's logistics, which will impact the frontline. The point being, it's unnecessary to use heavy weapons on civilian infrastructure when there's no strategy behind it.

Any Chinese attack on India must take into account Taiwan. The idea behind attacking India is to prepare for Taiwan, nothing else. If it wasn't for Taiwan, then unless India does something along the LAC, the Chinese are least likely to start a war with India. The status quo benefits them greatly, especially when they can change it ever so slightly with little blowback, as demostrated in 2020.

The Chinese don't have divisions. PAP is all great and everything, but not enough against the IA in the mountains. And drones can't replace soldiers. You can't have 4 drones for every soldier and expect that to give you a 5:1 superiority. Hell, this claim alone is laughable.

Sure, the PLAAF can have 3000-4000 jets, but such numbers serve no purpose. China needs 3000-4000 jets because they need a thousand jets against each of their main adversaries. It's basically 600-800 jets in each command. Otoh, the IAF only need 800-900 jets in total.

It doesn't matter if the enemy has 1000 jets or 10000 jets, the question is if they can gain an advantage in the air with their primary capabilities. Meaning, the IAF only needs 100 jets to defeat either 1000 Chinese jets or 4000 as long as those 100 jets are up to the task. Ever since the 90s, numbers have become meaningless, it's more about your best jet, networking and plenty of ammo. Logic and common sense must be used here. Regardless of how many jets the Chinese have, they can't use more than a few hundred at a time, maybe not even that. It's literally common sense, the airspace is too small.

Even Russia is flying just 16 jets at a time for the air policing mission over Ukraine. So it's quite literally happening in real life, in a real war.

Real life example of common sense. If there are two groups of people each having 4 and 16 people resply, and they need a 4-seater car for transportation, then the first group needs 1 car and the second group needs 4. But we have a genius here telling us the first group needs 4 cars too.

So let me say this in the simplest way possible. If the Chinese build 4000 jets, which they very well can, and if they bring 1000 jets to our side and lose badly, then they have to scrap those remaining 3000 jets and rebuild their air force. Those 3000 jets will be absolutely useless. They can still bring them over and have them shot down, no problem.

Another thing. The PLAGF has finished its modernisation, almost. The IA is only beginning its modernisation. So, every year the Chinese wait to attack India, the stronger India gets. We will enter 2023 at our weakest in comparison to what we will be in 2030, whereas the Chinese will more or less be stagnant, minus a few upgrades, 'cause they will have to wait for their next major modernisation cycle, which will be at least 20-25 years away. The next one could begin in 2040 for their 2049 goal. So anytime from mid-2023 onwards, they can bring it on.

Data can be considered correct, disinformation or misinformation only if its capable of being understood by the reader.

 

[_Anonymous_]

So Russia attacking infrastructure deep inside Ukraine is both to debilitate it & demoralise it's people but China achieves no such goal in a similar campaign against India especially when we have an active 5th column in the opposition & their minions in the media who'd be up in arms citing total government failure in prosecuting the war something we got a good glimpse of during the Wing commander Abhinandan episode & yet here's the analysis .

Btw this scenario in itself was portrayed as being something the Chinese would indulge in only under certain conditions which I've listed in my previous post .

I keep learning new things from in house strategic analyst after 7 yrs of engaging - directly or otherwise .

Fortunately for us in 1962 it was only the CPM backing China - itself the result of a split within the CPI which didn't support India's cause out of the goodness of it's heart but under direct instructions from Moscow. Namboodripad appealed to Indians asking them to back China's cause asserting India was the aggressor & virtually admitting China's chairman was our chaiman too .

Any other nation & both him & his party would've been buried . Here they get elected & play kingmakers. The only reason the CPM was silent on the Galwan clashes & what transpired on the LAC in 2020 was the changed mood in the country . If they weren't lynched then they'd surely come close to such a fate now .

On the one hand we're informed by story teller that the units involved in the Taiwan operations would be totally different from the ones in the Indian campaign & on the other hand we're being informed by the same source that the Indian campaign is to get the Chinese armed forces battle ready .

Anyway , moving on from the last gem to another one - the PAP isn't as great as the IA even if they're ex PLA but we seem to be forgetting that they're gaining valuable experience in mountain warfare since 2020 and would serve the same role the ITBP would in case of a war .

Moreover a swarm of Chinese mini drones hovering 1 km away from the summit of a ridgeline with a sangar , controlled by the PLA at some temporary base 4-5 kms away , containing say a platoon of our jawans can pick & choose their targets assuming they're equipped with a sniper rifle , an RPG , a mini rocket or a mini A2G missile.

I think the last two parts are already under development with Turkey ( or probably proposed - I'm not sure ) who're further miniaturizing those missiles meant for their Bayrakhtar & other drones . If Turkey's doing it , I don't see why China lacks the ability. In fact as I've written earlier I don't see why India can't develop these capabilities too either indigenously or in collaboration with a friendly nation like say Israel.

It's these tactical innovations apart from strategic moves like repeated massive missile barrages , equally massive cyber attacks & relentless sorties with a huge complement of FAs that's going to help achieve their objectives. They can't afford to approach this problem the same old fashioned way with similar predictable solutions . Unfortunately that's what we seem to think they'd do .

*Yawn* @ example.

If the PLAAF comes with 75 FAs each flying in from 3 - 6 bases attacking 3-6 different fronts across the "miniature" or "small" ~3500 kms LAC simultaneously , which makes it 225 FAs with say 25 FAs of these being the J-20s forming the tip of the spear of each of these formations with another 225 prepared to take off from their respective bases , I'd definitely like to see how're we going to take them on based on current projections for 2030 not current strength . Not only will they have these numbers by 2030 , they'd also have the bases with such capabilities to house & launch them within the hinterland but adjoining Tibet .

It's a request that all justifications for Russia's approach to air warfare not be thrown at desis but at Paddy & the westerners on the Ukraine Russia conflict thread . Propoganda is best directed at ones enemies either current or potential & one learns the difference between deception & self deception.

If China brings 1000 FAs & loses badly.... When we were & are being told constantly by the same that J-20 is better than the F-22 & the F-35, besides coming in huge numbers & which by 2030 would be a brand new iteration with suitable upgrades is going to be defeated by a 36 Rafales & 272 odd MKIs. See this is what happens when one indulges in a lot of story telling. One forgets what one has said when & where.

PLA full theatreization / upgradation / modernization program will be thru by 2026-28 .

Ditto @comprehending data.

 

[Innominate]

So Russia attacking infrastructure deep inside Ukraine is both to debilitate it & demoralise it's people but China achieves no such goal in a similar campaign against India especially when we have an active 5th column in the opposition & their minions in the media who'd be up in arms citing total government failure in prosecuting the war something we got a good glimpse of during the Wing commander Abhinandan episode & yet here's the analysis .

Btw this scenario in itself was portrayed as being something the Chinese would indulge in only under certain conditions which I've listed in my previous post .

I keep learning new things from in house strategic analyst after 7 yrs of engaging - directly or otherwise .

Fortunately for us in 1962 it was only the CPM backing China - itself the result of a split within the CPI which didn't support India's cause out of the goodness of it's heart but under direct instructions from Moscow. Namboodripad appealed to Indians asking them to back China's cause asserting India was the aggressor & virtually admitting China's chairman was our chaiman too .

Any other nation & both him & his party would've been buried . Here they get elected & play kingmakers. The only reason the CPM was silent on the Galwan clashes & what transpired on the LAC in 2020 was the changed mood in the country . If they weren't lynched then they'd surely come close to such a fate now .

On the one hand we're informed by story teller that the units involved in the Taiwan operations would be totally different from the ones in the Indian campaign & on the other hand we're being informed by the same source that the Indian campaign is to get the Chinese armed forces battle ready .

Anyway , moving on from the last gem to another one - the PAP isn't as great as the IA even if they're ex PLA but we seem to be forgetting that they're gaining valuable experience in mountain warfare since 2020 and would serve the same role the ITBP would in case of a war .

Moreover a swarm of Chinese mini drones hovering 1 km away from the summit of a ridgeline with a sangar , controlled by the PLA at some temporary base 4-5 kms away , containing say a platoon of our jawans can pick & choose their targets assuming they're equipped with a sniper rifle , an RPG , a mini rocket or a mini A2G missile.

I think the last two parts are already under development with Turkey ( or probably proposed - I'm not sure ) who're further miniaturizing those missiles meant for their Bayrakhtar & other drones . If Turkey's doing it , I don't see why China lacks the ability. In fact as I've written earlier I don't see why India can't develop these capabilities too either indigenously or in collaboration with a friendly nation like say Israel.

It's these tactical innovations apart from strategic moves like repeated massive missile barrages , equally massive cyber attacks & relentless sorties with a huge complement of FAs that's going to help achieve their objectives. They can't afford to approach this problem the same old fashioned way with similar predictable solutions . Unfortunately that's what we seem to think they'd do .

*Yawn* @ example.

If the PLAAF comes with 75 FAs each flying in from 3 - 6 bases attacking 3-6 different fronts across the "miniature" or "small" ~3500 kms LAC simultaneously , which makes it 225 FAs with say 25 FAs of these being the J-20s forming the tip of the spear of each of these formations with another 225 prepared to take off from their respective bases , I'd definitely like to see how're we going to take them on based on current projections for 2030 not current strength . Not only will they have these numbers by 2030 , they'd also have the bases with such capabilities to house & launch them within the hinterland but adjoining Tibet .

It's a request that all justifications for Russia's approach to air warfare not be thrown at desis but at Paddy & the westerners on the Ukraine Russia conflict thread . Propoganda is best directed at ones enemies either current or potential & one learns the difference between deception & self deception.

If China brings 1000 FAs & loses badly.... When we were & are being told constantly by the same that J-20 is better than the F-22 & the F-35, besides coming in huge numbers & which by 2030 would be a brand new iteration with suitable upgrades is going to be defeated by a 36 Rafales & 272 odd MKIs. See this is what happens when one indulges in a lot of story telling. One forgets what one has said when & where.

PLA full theatreization / upgradation / modernization program will be thru by 2026-28 .

Ditto @comprehending data.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1609563148872212481

 

[Rajput Lion]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1609563148872212481

Shaurya

@Ashwin

Do you now believe that Shaurya is in production or still have some doubt?

 

[randomradio]

Did I just read an Ignoramus's attempts at analysis? Wow! Living up to the name I see. Considering my analysis of Galwan was backed by the ex-army chief and an active analyst from a high funda think tank out of a cesspool of half-baked opinions means yes, there's something to learn from my posts.

Attacking India's hinterland does nothing in terms of psyops because the war will be short. Ukraine war is a long war, any Sino-India war in the current era will last a few months at best. Destruction of Indian infrastructure serves no purpose unless the PLAGF doesn't win on the ground. Also, Ukraine war is an existential war, it's directly affected the lives of 70% of Ukrainians. A Sino-India war is just something that's gonna happen far away. The Chinese are always free to destroy our infrastructure, get the same done in return and then go to war with the US, yeah, genius idea.

Google the term "theatre command", then read up on the PLA's ORBAT, which is more or less public. Once enough knowledge is gained, which shouldn't be difficult for those who are starting from zero, one will understand what's actually happening. So yeah, the PLA units facing Taiwan are different from the ones that will fight India. PLA has been designed to fight 3-4 wars simultaneously, and each theater command is its own self-contained military force. The equipment and training needed to fight in the mountains and fight across water are completely different, for example only one of them need a landing craft. Common sense will help here. India is the same, the units meant to defeat Pakistan (Strike Corps, armoured division) are different from those meant to deal with China (Mountain Strike Corps, mountain division). Common sense is most definitely necessary here.

Drones... lol.

And that hilarious attempt at creating a scenario when the poster doesn't even know the proper numbers available for such a purpose in each country...

When it comes to high-end ASFs, the Russians have 250, the Americans have 300, the Chinese have 500 and the Indians have 300. The Pakistanis have zero. And unlike India, the Chinese need to have jets available at the other fronts too, so it's India that has a numerical advantage. The Chinese surpassing the F-22 is long term, not today, not tomorrow, but many years from now. The Chinese will be lucky if today's J-20 can manage to even survive against the Rafale.

If the Chinese attack with 75 jets, we still need only 20 in the air to defeat those. This is how air forces practice DCA. A defender only needs 1 jet for every 4 enemy jets in the air. More jets are scrambled to make up for losses and build mass on both sides.

The PLA doesn't need until 2026-28 to finish theaterisation, they already have finished it. They need that much time to have the mass necessary to fight the US. It's a totally different thing, and an example of how data is incorrectly comprehended by the masses and applied to the wrong things.

 

[Ashwin]

Shaurya

@Ashwin

Do you now believe that Shaurya is in production or still have some doubt?

Not even close. @hellbent

 

[marich01]

Do you guys see future variants under Pralay/Shaurya programs to create incremental improvement like the agni series but under the conventional strike capability scheme? I mean it just does not make sense to cap it up to 1000km for conventional strike, with hypersonic propulsion tech very near. Our missile program is very matured but for ballistic segment only. Definite lag in delivery platform/option in conventional strike ability, cruise & air delivered strike options, entirely dependent on import. 150-200km srbm is of limited impact these days. Handy against pakistan & close to border skirmishes but not much for else. Silver bullets are still prioritized over conventional ability.

 

[_Anonymous_]

I always maintained having resident story teller here was a boon to us & a loss to the likes of ORF, Rand Corporation , Heritage Foundation , Lowy , ( hell, why set one's targets low when story teller himself is blowing his own trumpet since no one else will except some ex Army Chief & an active analyst { never heard of a passive one } from a high funda TT both of whom shall remain unknown but who lurk here & pass on resident
storyteller's views as their own ) Brookings even , which means they're sorely , deprived of good entertainment.

There's something I've come to admire about both Paddy & resident story teller & that's their utter lack of self consciousness in declaring what they do , with supreme belief in their declarations. One needs this sort of confidence in ones life.

From now on resident story teller would be known as Fellow of Brookings Institution or in short , Brookings Fellow ( I know that the above post - which I've indirectly quoted particularly the bombastic opening is a product of euphoria courtesy 8 pm , but it reminds me of the old song - you asked for it , you've had it )

I thought the entire thrust of my argument was all along premised on 2 beliefs which I've declared since the very beginning & unlike goal post shifting Brookings Fellow , I have been consistent about , namely - I don't foresee the engagement happening before 2028-30 timeframe preferably 2030 onwards & secondly whatever China's calculations or rather miscalculations , this isn't going to be a short sharp war at all.

Now you can either buy this premise duly referenced below & in my earlier posts on this thread or read Brookings Fellow of "finances are there but not exactly there " fame . He's also used to believing & selling stories about half pregnant women. You don't believe it, he'd bore you to death & trip himself a couple of times in the maze he builds while in the process of making you believe it. Hence the title - resident story teller turned Brookings Fellow.

Ukraine war is a long war - admitted those who started out by giving Ukraine a few weeks or a month at best. Sino Indian war of 1962 lasted 2 months with a few weeks of lull in between for proposed negotiations by the Chinese which was rebuffed by India. As & when the - to be fought war goes into the 4th month, Brookings Fellow here will compare it to WW-2 & justifying it as a short war . He's already done so above citing "few months" though those" few" as experience tells us is a pretty nebulous quantity besides being extremely malleable stretching from 2 -12 months. Hell , if you point out 12 months is 1 yr , you get laughed at . That's the beauty of being a story teller , a veteran at that & a Brookings Fellow . That's confidence pro max as millenials put it By God, imagine what're TedX listeners losing out on?!

Destruction of India's infrastructure was always proposed by myself as subject to certain conditions primary among them would be our lack of < 2000 kms conventional missile. The fear among our planners was always that such a missile fired shouldn't be misconstrued by our enemies as carrying a strategic warhead thus setting off a chain reaction .

While this was true of Pakistan, our Geniuses out there &. Genius in here never quite foresaw a conflict with China hence didn't ADEQUATELY prepare for it. ( In the event we ought to be grateful they tested the Shaurya) . That's the reason the deployment of Pralay wasn't given the go ahead As was the case with the Shaurya. Apparently things have changed As far as Pralay goes though we've yet to receive confirmation on the Shaurya though some members have pointed out we may have already begun production & deployment .

As is plainly visible our planners are pretty self conscious people. Wish they had the kind of confidence resident Brookings Fellow enjoys.

Further we need them in numbers to deter an attack on our hinterland & the kind of production capacity too which can churn out numbers . It's only when the hinterland of China is under severe threat that they'd think twice before embarking on such a venture. Any slip up and they'd go for the jugular. To make matters worse we've discarded our own taboos & erected a defense corridor in UP including Brahmos production unit as opposed to the South where such ventures were & are located for precisely this reason that too back in the day where there was no threat of BMs but only air attacks , if at all .

Moreover all this will come later in the war perhaps around the 3rd or 4th month , I speculated, if they've been unable to achieve their objective or they've partly accomplished it, in part to get public opinion against the war but also equally important to degrade our infrastructure particularly our defense manufacturing units. PysOps isn't the only reason they'd make such an attempt which is something story teller refuses to understand or consider.

I'd like to know in the absence of any such deterrence as Shaurya or any equivalent , why exactly would China or any other peer country we go to war with not consider destroying our defense mfg units in the hinterland specially when their own mfg hubs are located 2-3000 kms deep in the hinterland far away from the conflict zone as opposed to our situation . I mean is this not common sense?

ORBATS keep changing from time to time unless story teller would have us believe it's static. Besides are we really supposed to believe what's revealed is exactly what's the facts on the ground as far as a theatre goes not as far as full capacities go - which again brings me to the first principles - the original question ( as an analogy let's consider the tech specs of an FA in the public domain . Are they indicative - yes , are they exhaustive - no , are they 100% accurate - hell not at all ) What's online are mostly pre Galwan ones - The Belfer report being a notable objection which highlights India's strengths in the matter but again pre 2020 . Since then , the Chinese have gone on a massive building spree in Tibet Xinjiang & surrounding provinces coming up with air strips, new bases, upgrading existing ones, etc

PLA's designed to fight wars on 3-4 fronts simultaneously doesn't translate to PLA fighting a war on 3-4 simultaneously. Are we to understand elements within one command cannot under any circumstances be transferred to another command , core units & specialised units aside ? Frankly I can't tell if Brookings Fellow is insulting our intelligence or his own.

Yet the same India has elements attached to our strike corps dedicated to Pakistan now doing duty in Ladakh . There are talks of dual purpose corps . IBGs have been carved out , etc . The details are all available online something which Brookings Fellow deliberately won't highlight.

This is Lt Gen Hooda in a paper last year in a less than sanguine mood than our very own Brookings Fellow ( but hey , what does he know , inspite of being Northern Army Commander ) arguing some of the points I've made saying the Indian Armed Forces policy is still based on denial than deterrent or punishment - a policy already outdated since 2013 especially since Galwan

Establishing Military Deterrence against China

Establishing Military Deterrence against China

www.delhipolicygroup.org

Yes drones - tonnes & tonnes of which China is acknowledged master in the world , including loitering ammunition like switchblades , around since 2011 whether adapted to mountain warfare I don't know but I don't foresee any major impediments to it too.

I don't keep a track of drones as it doesn't interest me . Besides unlike Brookings Fellow it isn't my bread & butter but since the question was asked I did some cursory data mining & here goes . It's even worse than I thought :

List of unmanned aerial vehicles of China - Wikipedia


Answer to What new military drones are the Chinese developing? by Paul Chen What new military drones are the Chinese developing?

Some of their micro & mini drones :

China's Mini-Drone Packs a Heavyweight Punch

Soldiers could carry the CH-901 into action and launch it from the field.

www.popularmechanics.com

Chinese military micro drone unveiled at Abu Dhabi weapons show

The tiny Fengniao, or Hummingbird, could be used for public security surveillance and inspecting dangerous places like chemical warehouses and pipelines, developer says.

amp.scmp.com

The US has only 300 ASFs & so does India with the MKIs ( I presume which even our own ex IAF & informed commentators confirm is due for a massive upgrade as of yesterday)? Hell , I don't mind this ( gold ) nugget of information of 300 IAF ASF a bit , though I'm sure underprivileged , uncouth , unclean , underaged , undersized urchin from the US ( isn't it sweetie ? @Innominate ) would take umbrage to the figure of 300 only ASFs of the US being peddled by Brookings Fellow .

This is a slightly older article by AVM Arjun Subramanian circa May 2018 articulating some of the same points I've echoed here but adding much more to it & explaining it in great detail with clarity bringing his considerable experience to bear on the subject matter.

https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/closing-gap-doctrinal-capability-appraisal-iaf-plaaf/

Another perspective by Air Marshal Anil Chopra on the same subject which I think was linked here.

The Way Ahead for the IAF

While the IAF has been modernising steadily, more needs to be done. The IAF must get back to the authorised force levels of 42 squadrons. Some often suggest that since Rafale and Su-30 MKI can achieve much greater effect than the older MiG 21s, why should the IAF continue to seek 42 squadrons? The argument is flawed. India’s adversaries are already moving forward to acquire fifth-generation fighters. They are not cutting down numb ..


Read more at:
How Prepared is the IAF for a War with China? - Indian Defence Review

I think we've gone over this nonsense of China requiring FAs based in other commands enough to know that no formal alliance exists among Quad partners which is to say that if there's an invasion of Taiwan are we to assume that Russia'd take advantage of it & invade China or would India do it on the LAC or even Vietnam or any of the ASEAN nations which have disputes with China in the SCS ?

Alternatively if China initiates war across the LAC , would the US initiate an invasion apart from closely buzzing Chinese coastal bases ? Who's the revanchist power in East Asia ? If China wants to it can shift the bulk of the PLAAF & other assets to a particular command leaving only a near skeletal presence in the original command. I don't think anyone is under any illusions that they can't except Brookings Fellow . It's another matter that depending on the theatre command seeing action whether all those or some of those assets are needed going by logistical limitations of the bases there .

Ah yes DCA just like CoD & various other such strategic games now available online developed by TTs like Brookings based on their infinite wisdom on how such air engagements occur. IAF is simply stupid to cry hoarse on falling squadron strength . Wonder why haven't they considered DCA ? Better still wonder when are they going to be acquainted with the genius of our one & only resident Brookings Fellow ?

I think the game here is very simple -> J-20 > / = Su-57 > F-35 / F-22 & the F-35 = / > Rafale . However the Rafale > J-20 . The proposition is very simple - take it or leave it . If you deny this equation the onus of proving Brookings Fellow wrong is on you else you can go thru his information overload where you'd see him frequently trip on the very points he's opposed / supported in the past taking the opposite stance now .

I half wanted to post what he's said w.r.t the J-20 vs the F-35 & F-35 vs Rafale here , which I didn't as I've asked him to desist from formally engaging in a direct manner . However if push comes to shove , I'd be more than pleased to make an exception. Spent nearly an hour data mining. Was re acquainted with a lot of gems .

The US admittedly took more than a decade to achieve full theatreization of all it's arms . Merely by announcing in 2015 that China would theatreize are we to assume there's no transition involved & that the entire theatreization has been accomplished ? Is that how Brookings institution has concluded ?

Below excerpt & link clearly indicating theatreization is still work in progress pointing out to a date closer to what I've suggested when the Chinese will be fully prepared to lauch their plans viz 2028-30 . The 2 yr from 2028 is a cushion for any delays or last minute development.

Half a decade later, the PLA is modifying its doctrine to incorporate lessons learned from these major changes. The new doctrine likely also takes into account the accelerating efforts to complete a major part of the overall Chinese modernization effort. As laid out in the 14th Five Year Plan (2021-2025), the PLA hopes to becoming “fully mechanized and fully informationized” by 2027, the one hundredth anniversary of the founding of the PLA. While the concerns about mechanization and informationization are mostly about the PLA’s equipment, upgrading its doctrine is a parallel necessity so the new equipment can be fully exploited.

How China’s Thinking About The Next War - Breaking Defense

The PLA Navy (PLAN) and PLA Air Force (PLAAF) are now the world’s largest, but China’s military modernization is not only focused on equipment. The PRC appears to be developing new strategies and doctrines. The PLA began shifting in the 1990s from preparing to fight “local wars under modern...

breakingdefense.com

Another excellent article from MP IDSA dtd Nov 2021 highlighting the same issues as the previous article from the perspective of the WTC about how the transition into joint commands is not smooth sailing in the least .

PLA’s Western Theatre Command in Transition | Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

Post 2015 reforms, the Western Theatre Command (WTC) of the PLA has been transforming itself into a joint theatre command that can fight wars against an adversary like India. Considering that India and China are involved in a border standoff, any strengthening of WTC’s combat capabilities is...

idsa.in

 

[Rajput Lion]

^^
While you may continue your debate with Random, there are few of your points I would like to address:

1. Shaurya is nothing but land launched version of K-15 Sagarika. So in a way, it has been in production for years. The current model which has been deployed and entered production is apparently new and more advanced version with more range/speed etc.

2. Pralay is also K-15 Sagarika or Shaurya itself, lol. It is NOT a new missile. The below fin booster which both K-15/Shaurya have got is not there in Pralay.

K-15/Shaurya(you can see the booster below the fins):

Pralay(literally the same missile sans the booster):

So, what's the point? These missiles were always with us, only now they have become/about to become operational. Why?

Now, even though what you say is correct that our focus regarding China was defensive in nature, but after Galwan it has changed now for ever and good. The above is a direct result of that.

And Random is correct because India ain't no Ukraine bro. Any Chinese attack on our civilian/infra or even military target would be met with equal counter fire.

Forget about the fact that we can also put conventional warheads in Agni series missiles to hit the 'real China'. Also forget about Shaurya/Pralay. Who's stopping India from attacking mainland China using Su-30MKI and extended range Brahmos combo? Sure if we are upto it, we can find loopholes inside Chinese IADS.

And I think when Random says India has 300 ASF, he means 262 Su-30MKIs + 36 Rafales = 298 fighters. Currently, our most potent fighter is Rafale followed by the Sukhoi. It's this combination of Rafale and Su-30s that our enemies will need to fear, IMO.

Rest, upto Random

 

[marich01]

For ground attack , we are well underestimating the mirages, which has been flying in LAC for past 2 years seamlessly & possibly the most acclimatized. In any chinky misadventure these will target entire chinese installations in the first go across the LAC.

 

[randomradio]

Wow, so much crap in one post. How do people find the time?

Anyway, I have considered asset transfers from other fronts already. The Chinese have 5 commands, 4 frontline commands and 1 reserve command. The WTC has 2 corps, and I have added 2 corps extra, 1 from the reserve command and another from a frontline command based in Yunnan. So that's 4 corps. Do they need more than that? I don't know, and I don't think so. Nevertheless, they can always add another corps from elsewhere. So at least 4-5 corps in total, or about 24-30 combat brigades versus the original 12 combat brigades, effectively the same strength as the active US Army.

Similarly, 250 J-20s sound impressive. But once divided amongst 5 commands, it's just 50 jets each. 500 J-20s would mean 100 jets for each command. Is it enough? It's more than enough. But I've still considered an extra 100 jets transferred from other commands. 200 J-20s is a massive, massive force. Do recall the Americans have only 123 combat-coded F-22s with 20 more in reserve.

The Indian Strike Corps that's been changed to MSC has lost its armoured division and has been requipped for mountain warfare. When they say dual-tasked, it's no longer suitable for warfare in the plains. You could say it's more suited to deal with PoL. The armoured division previously connected to it has been turned into a strategic reserve.

As for why modern warfare takes little time, this video should help understand how quickly the Nazis won their victories until they screwed up against the SU.

Pay particular attention to Poland, Norway, France and the first 6 months of Op Barbarossa. It all happens in the first 5 minutes.
(Would recommend with audio.)

Poland lasts 15 seconds, Norway lasts 12, and France lasts 18. While WW2 lasted years, the actual fighting in Europe was very short 'cause of maneuver warfare. Then it picked up again in 1944 while the SU slowly ate into the Nazis via attrition warfare.

Western analysts believed the war in Ukraine would finish within a few days to a week, and the video is proof of that. Similarly, if the Russians stop half-arsing it, they can finish the war in a week or less. So it wasn't an unrealistic assessment. Ukraine also managed to take back territory in just a few days when they did their offensive in Aug-Sept. Similarly, India is expected to take Pakistan that rapidly, within just a few days.

So what the Chinese are hoping to do against India is the same as what the Nazis did in Europe, ie, finish any offensive in a matter of days. What we are hoping is what the Soviets managed to do at 5:15, except we want to be able to do that from day 1 instead of 180.

It's the first few days that determine the course of the war. If nothing much happens during that time, ie, within a week, then the war devolves into a war of attrition. In the Sino-India context, a war of attrition is meaningless simply 'cause it's not existential to either party.

During WW2, all countries were fighting for the right to live. A Sino-India war does not carry the same amount of risk. A Sino-India war turning into an existential war can only happen within the thresholds of WW3.

A Sino-India war is only possible within the next few years, when they believe they have the infrastructure, economic and military advantage. After 2030, it's very unlikely due to the militarisation of Japan and the US, apart from India playing catch up. They will actually push for peace with India by then. Which is why all we have to do is buy time. It's the Chinese who are running out of time.