Top 15 countries with the highest military expenditure

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Ranking of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel

State - Active Military - Reserve Military - Paramilitary - Total

People's Republic of China - 2,285,000 - 800,000 - 1,500,000 - 4,585,000

United States of America - 1,458,219 - 1,458,500 - 11,035 - 2,927,754

India - 1,325,000 - 2,142,821 - 1,300,586 - 4,768,407

Russian Federation - 1,027,000 - 754,000 - 449,000 - 2,230,000

Pakistan - 617,000 - 513,000 - 304,000 - 1,434,000

Iran 523,000 1,800,000 1,510,000 3,833,000

List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indian Armed Forces Pictures















 
Last edited:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Top Ten Countries with Largest Navies

Top Ten Countries with Largest Navies

List of aircraft carriers in service in Asia by 2011

Country - Navy - In service - In reserve - Under construction

India - Indian Navy - 1 - 0 - 2

China - PLA Navy - 1 - 0 - 2

Thailand - Royal Thai Navy - 1

List of aircraft carriers in service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


=> INS Vikramaditya to be delivered at the end of 2013

defence eXpress: INS Vikramaditya to be delivered at the end of 2013


 
Last edited by a moderator:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Combat aircraft by country

Country - Fighters - Bombers - Attack

1: USA -- 3,043 -- 171 -- 1,185
2: Russia - 1,264 -- 166 -- 1,267
3: China -- 1,130 -- 118 -- 370
4: India --- 901 --- 91 --- 220

List of countries by level of military equipment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


=> PAK FA's debut makes Washington ponder

Russia's fifth generation fighter, the PAK FA, will enter service by 2015, according to Russian Air Force Commander-in-Chief Colonel General Alexander Zelin speaking earlier this week, Defence Talk reports. Almost simultaneously, in 2016, the US will put into service two new fighter versions: the F-35A for the Air Force and the F-35C for the Navy. For the United States, this means that it must at any cost implement its plan to manufacturing the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The advantages of the new Russian fighter were demonstrated to the public at the MAKS 2011 air show – something western experts see as yet further confirmation of Russia's firm intention not only to produce Т-50 fighters for the Russian army but also to export them to other countries.

Russia announced plans to buy 60 PAK FA fighters by 2020. According to official information, there are plans to put into service 250 fighters and maybe more, western analysts say. India already intends to buy at least 250-300 Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) based on Russia's Т-50 and adapted to India's demands.
Since the United States stopped producing its F-22 fighter, the F-35 multirole fighter has been the only alternative to the Russian PAK FA available for the US and other NATO countries. At this point, the Russian fighter outdoes its western counterpart in terms of speed, maneuverability, sight range, lifting capacity, and even radar evasion. Russia describes its PAK FA as a fighter that "thanks to the use of complex materials and advanced technology <...> can reduce recognition by radar, optic and infrared recognition systems to a minimum."

As for the limited optical visibility, experts largely attribute it to use of metamaterials and so-called "e-camouflage" in the more recent versions of the PAK FA. The negative refraction index of metamaterials makes them an ideal means for camouflaging military targets, as they cannot be discovered by radio reconnaissance equipment within a certain range of frequencies. Using this technology, on-board cameras record everything surrounding the aircraft, in real time mode.

Supercomputers and metamaterials allow the cameras to project the image on to the aircraft's surface, making it invisible. A similar effect was used in one James Bond movie, Die Another Day, where 007 was driving around in an Aston Martin invisible to the naked eye.

Being a multirole fighter, the PAK FA can also be deployed to repulse daylight ground attacks. It does not have to wait until night to perform combat operations, as was the case with the now decommissioned American stealth attack aircraft F-117, or perhaps the already mentioned F-35. Being invisible to enemy pilot puts PAK FA in a much more advantageous position. Yet the F-35 has a super sensitive electronic optical recognition system, which, in combination with helmet-mounted displays, allows pilots quickly to detect the warmth emanating from the enemy fighter.

Despite the PAK FA's e-camouflage technology, Russia should not rest on its laurels, experts warn. The United States also has a fifth-generation fighter capable of competing with its closest analogues, both the Russian one and China's J-20. Even so, the US will need to accumulate a lot of such aircraft if it wants not only to replenish its combat losses but also to get the upper hand in the fight for aerospace dominance.

Western analysts call on the US Congress to take into consideration Russia's plans to export its new fighter to other countries. Along with India, potential buyers include Iran (if the UN cancels its embargo on weapons supplies), Arab nations (if the US refuses to sell its fighters), as well as Venezuela, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and perhaps even China, given that the PAK FA have a greater bomb-carrying capacity than the J-20, Defence Talk reports.

Thus, conclusions have been drawn but it is unclear how Washington will react to calls for urgent measures.

One thing is clear: Russia's fifth generation fighter, the PAK FA, is a pioneer in the revival of Russia's aerospace industry. Russia hopes to retain its position as the world's leading manufacturer of military aviation equipment, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said at the MAKS 2011 official opening ceremony.

"The government has supported and will continue to support Russia's aerospace industry. This is a clear strategic priority for us", he stressed.

From Russia with love: PAK FA's debut makes Washington ponder | Russia & India Report

India and Russia going to sign biggest-ever defence deal worth $ 35 billion

NEW DELHI: India's quest for a futuristic stealth fifth-generation fighter, which will see the country spend around $35 billion over the next 20 years in its biggest-ever defence project, has zoomed into the decisive phase now.

India and Russia are getting all set to ink the full and final design or R&D phase contract for the 5th Gen fighter by this year-end or early-2013, say sources. It will again underline India's firm rejection of the US offer of its Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) or the F-35 'Lightning-II'.

Ahead of the R&D contract, under which India wants to induct over 200 stealth fighters from 2022 onwards, a senior team of Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) engineers and IAF experts is going to Russia within a fortnight to ensure that the "full documentation and other work" of the earlier preliminary design contract (PDC) has been completed.

During his visit to Moscow last week, IAF chief Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne reviewed the performance of the 5th Gen fighter, called Sukhoi T-50.

While the Indian fighter will primarily be based on the T-50, it will be tweaked to IAF requirements.

India had inked the $295 million PDC with Russia in December, 2010. The R&D contract on the anvil is pegged at $11 billion, with India and Russia chipping in with $5.5 billion each.

"The three Russian T-50 prototypes have flown around 180 sorties till now. HAL's Ozar facility at Nashik will get three prototypes in 2014, 2017 and 2019...they will be flown by IAF test pilots," said a source.

"Russia has already given the draft R&D contract to us. It will include the cost of designing, infrastructure build-up at Ozar, prototype development and flight testing. So, India will have scientists and test pilots based both in Russia and Ozar during the R&D phase up to 2019. HAL will subsequently begin manufacturing the fighters," he added.

Interestingly, after first specifying the requirement for at least 166 single-seat and 48 twin-seat of these 5th Gen fighters, India is veering around to the view that it will go in for only single-cockpit jets now.

"Both F-35 and T-50 are single-seaters. A second cockpit will compromise the stealth capabilities by at least 15% apart from adding to the weight and reducing fuel capacity. Moreover, R&D costs could go up by another $2 billion for the twin-seater," he said.

IAF is confident the swing-role fighter will meet its future operational needs.

As a critical interim measure and confronted with a declining number of fighter squadrons, IAF also wants the almost $20 billion MMRCA (medium multi-role combat aircraft) project to acquire 126 French Rafale fighters to be sealed within this fiscal.

India and Russia going to sign biggest-ever defence deal worth $ 35 billion - Times Of India
 
Last edited:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
DRDO press release of today's successful anti-ballistic missile test



AIR DEFENCE INTERCEPTOR MISSILE SUCCESSFULLY DESTROYS BALLISTIC MISSILE

The Interceptor Missile AAD launched by the Scientists of DRDO from Wheeler's Island, Odisha successfully destroyed the incoming Ballistic Missile at an altitude of 15 Kms. The interception took place at 12.52hrs. The target missile, a modified version of Prithvi, mimicking the enemy's ballistic missile, was launched from Launch Complex III, Chandipur.

Long Range Radar and MFC Radar located far away could detect the Missile from take-off and tracked it through its entire path. The total trajectory of the incoming Missile was continuously estimated by the guidance computer and subsequently the AAD Missile was launched at an appropriate time to counter and kill the ballistic missile.

The Ring Laser Gyro based Navigation System in Target, Fibre Optic Gyro based INS in Interceptor, Onboard computers, Guidance systems, Actuation Systems and the critical RF Seekers used for the terminal phase have performed excellently. The AAD Missile system initially guided by Inertial Navigation system was continuously getting update of the target position by the Radar through a data link. The Radio Frequency (RF) seeker tracked the Missile & Onboard computer guided the Missile towards the Target Missile and hit the target. The Radio Proximity Fuse (RPF) exploded the warhead thereby destroying the target missile completely.

In this mission, a special feature of intercepting multiple target with multiple interceptor was demonstrated successfully. An electronic target with a range of 1500 Kms was launched and the Radars picked up the target missile, tracked the target missile subsequently & launched an electronic interceptor missile. This electronic interceptor missile destroyed the electronic target missile at an altitude of 120 Kms. All the four missiles were tracked by the Radars and all the guidance and launch computers operated in full operational mode for handling multiple targets with multiple interceptor. All the four missiles were in the sky simultaneously and both the interceptions took place near simultaneously. This has proved the capability of DRDO to handle multiple targets with multiple interceptors simultaneously. The complete Radar Systems, Communication Networks, Launch Computers, Target update Systems and state of the art Avionics have been completely proven in this Mission. :thumb:

Indian Strategic Studies: DRDO press release of today's successful anti-ballistic missile test

Russia Promotes S-400 at DefExpo

Almaz Antey has recently received a multi-year order for the S-400 Triumf surface-air missiles (SAM), equipping the Russian defense forces with several regiments of the advanced SAMs. For the near term the company is likely to be focusing on domestic deliveries. However, despite the Russian Defense Ministry claim that there are no plans so far to export the S-400 Triumph, Russia is already pitching its top-of-the-line air defense system for export. At DefExpo 2012 in India this week, Almaz Antey officials were promoting the Triumph air and missile defense system.

Defense Update spoke with Sushin Yury, Chief of Department at Almaz Antey the corporation that designed and built the missile, about the possibility of Russia selling the S-400 Triumph to India. In the words of Mr. Sushin, "if India shows interest in the purchase of the S-400, Russia can definitely provide India with all the information it needs about the system." While Russia has offered the system to several countries, to date the S-400 has not been exported by Russia to any other country.

Triumf is widely regarded as one of the most advanced SAM systems in the world and one considered an important element in the Russian air defense for the next generations. It was further revealed to Defense-Update that the S-500 is not an upgrade of the S-400 and both these systems will have pivotal albeit different roles in Air-Defense. The S-400 causes much concern among western air forces, as none of the existing 4++ generation fighter aircraft, nor the F-35 JSF, are designed to penetrate areas defended by the Triumf. The system can simultaneously engage 36 targets, controlling up to 72 ready to fire missiles of four different types, providing an integrated multi-layered air defense system. :thumb:

Typical unstealthy, or partially stealthy combat aircraft will have more difficulty surviving within the coverage of the S-400 systems. Its high transmit power, large radar and missile seeker apertures, low side lobes, generous use of monopulse angle tracking and extensive ECCM features make these systems difficult to jam effectively. Self protection jammers commonly used against other surface-to-air missiles will need to produce relatively high X-band power output, and exploit monopulse angle tracking deception techniques, where Digital RF Memory (DRFM) techniques with high signal fidelity are nearly essential. Even so the challenges in defeating these systems with a self protection jammer are not trivial – raw power-aperture does matter in this game.

Russia Promotes S-400 at DefExpo, Eying Indian Air & Missile Defense Opportunities | Defense Update - Military Technology & Defense News
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
bt this is nt something to be proud of bt rather concerning

we seriously need to decrease the defence budget.considering our economy our defence budget(as per GDP) now stand at 4.4% should be decreased to below 2.5%
India's planned expenditure for fiscal: Rs.14,90,925 crores
Defence budget: Rs.1,93,407 crores.
Defence budget as a % of annual budget: 13%, (1.9% of GDP of India)
Defence budget breakup:
Revenue Expenditure: Rs.113829 crores; Capital Expenditure: Rs.79,579 crores
IA: Rs.97,302 crores; IAF: 48,191 crores; IN: 37,314 crores; DRDO: 10,635 crores; OFs: 135 crores

But each year, of the capital outlay, we do surrender a certain amount depending on how severely the fiscal situation of the country is strained so as to manage the fiscal deficit.
this Defence Budget Estimate of India at 1.9% of GDP has a unique meaning as compare to US & EU we find. defence budget of US is around $700bil (4.5% of its GDP) and it may only go down from here. no way that US & EU may even have its 2% long term growth, they had for last 30+ years. US & EU may hardly maintain 0% growth rate for this decade, if not less, as growing business/export of emerging economies/China have taken a large portion of business of OECD and now they are going to have business of high tech products more in future...... and on the top of that, debt level of US is very high, and it is recommended to reduce its defence expenditure by at least 20% too, to reduce borrowing debts, which US is currently borrowing at around $4bil every day to meet its expenditure....

but even if defence expenditure of Pakistan is around 4.5% to its GDP, it would always be able to spend at least this much as Pakistan is a developing economy, which would at least have 5%+ growth for the next 20 years, (same is true for India, the developing economy too and emerging among BRIC). while India is projected to have close to 7% growth on average for the next 20 years, while China would also grow close to India, but its growth would come down from 2015 onward.......

here we find that even if defence expenditure of India is hardly 1.9% of its GDP, its still the 3rd largest while measuring in PPP terms. and there is no problem to increase defence expenditure by on even 20% per year on average over the next 10 years, which would itself keep it close to 2.0% to its GDP on long run, (while considering inflation/value added etc). hence the current military strength of India is based on the least it spend on its defence as compare to US & EU, at hardly 1.9% to GDP, and it can only go up in future. while US & EU would only go down, no way that it may have high defence expenditure than its current level, at any time in future till 21st century..........

The Hollow Empire
06 October 2012

The US is a fast deteriorating military power and as proved by events in Afghanistan and Iraq in the face of resurgent nations and steadfast resistance has suffered major defeats despite its technological superiority.

While no one was looking, the US lost the war in Afghanistan. The announcement that joint operations involving US/NATO forces and Afghan military and police personnel will cease — "temporarily" — went down with a whimper, not a bang. Since the whole purpose of our continued presence in that country is supposedly to train the governemtn forces, the entire rationale for the war just fell apart, and isn't it funny — as in funny-weird, rather than funny-ha-ha — that nobody noticed?

Well, not really: we're in campaign mode, and neither major party presidential candidate is much interested in the subject of a war we've been fighting for over a decade, at a cost measured in the trillions (aside from the incalculable human misery). Mitt Romney is mum, and President Barack Obama has more important matters to consider.

Since Romney's foreign policy team favors a policy rejected by the overwhelming majority of the American people, it's no wonder their candidate has little to say about it. As for Obama: remember when he and his platoon of "national security Democrats" were telling us Afghanistan was the "good war"? Now that its goodness seems to have dissipated with voters, the administration would rather not remind Americans how much Obama deepened that particular quagmire.

As for the voters themselves: the same people who told pollsters they supported the war in the earlier part of the decade are now telling the same pollsters they want out. The American attention span has been getting shorter over the past decade, and if only we can get them to the point of being bored with the next war before it begins, we'll be — literally — ahead of the game. Speaking of losing while no one was looking: whatever happened to Iraq? Oh yes, now I remember: it went under the influence of Iran just after the US presence was officially — albeit not actually — ended in a country where nearly 5,000 American soldiers died in a war to export what Washington likes to call "democracy." :toilet:

This is yet another disaster not to be noticed or even mentioned by our political class — including not only the politicians but also the news media and the commentators that make careers out of covering up for and sucking up to Official Washington. The policy wonks, the Approved Pundits, the publicists and professional agitators of the left and the right — when will we hear a peep out of any them about these dismal and costly failures? Would it be after the election? My guess: never.

And that's just how the War Party likes it. They don't want anyone asking uncomfortable questions about future wars, especially the looming conflict just around the next corner. But my question is broader, and it's this: when was the last time the US actually won a war? No, no, I don't mean Grenada – that tiny island in the Caribbean. I mean a real honest-to-goodness all-out bang them up war, with an opponent who had at least a fighting chance.

Before the recent spate of attempted conquests, there was Vietnam — a flat out defeat: and Korea — a draw. On a smaller scale, none of the "anti-communist" insurgencies we sponsored in the 1980s in Nicaragua and El Salvador succeeded in producing anything but trouble for us and untold misery for the inhabitants of those unfortunate countries — all in all, our efforts in Central and South America during the cold war era amounted to the Bay of Pigs writ large. In order to tout a war that can be counted as an unambiguous American victory we have to go all the way back to World War II. However, even this undoubted military triumph had its Pyrrhic aspect. Since it launched us on an interventionist course that landed us where we are today — teetering on the edge of bankruptcy and hated around the world — the original Good War was, arguably, the great-granddaddy of all the defeats to come.

Conservatives credit Ronald Reagan and "Star Wars" for supposedly "winning" the cold war, but we didn't win a single battle in that fifty-year global conflict. In reality, the Soviets defeated themselves — in the economic realm, where their centrally-planned economy proved inadequate to the task of providing basic necessities, and on the battlefield in Afghanistan, where they were beaten by the same forces that threw out the British and have finally defeated us. If the US is an empire, as anti-interventionists (and the more honest interventionists) describe it, then it is a hollow one. :tsk:

Our much-vaunted military might is a myth. We haven't won a war in over sixty years: what is supposedly the mightiest war-making machine on earth has been out-fought and out-maneuvered by a rag-tag bunch of Taliban bandits and two-bit local warlords. They call us the "hyperpower" — a role which seems to mean we're at the constant beck and call of our allies, all of them employing very active Washington lobbyists. Bedeviled by our friends, reviled by our enemies, and envied (and resented) by all, the US has no friends in the world — only clients, dependents, and targets.

To top it off, we're out of money — and the US economy, the engine and motive power of the Last Superpower's alleged invincibility, is showing signs of structural instability. If the whole edifice collapses tomorrow, who will be surprised? :facepalm:

As Washington's lords and ladies bask in the unreal glory of the US' imperial delusion, and look forward to yet another exciting coronation ceremony this winter, the peasants with pitchforks are gathering in the shadow of the castle, their voices rising above the ordinary din generated by our chattering classes. The American people are waking up to the reality, even if our elites are not, and it is a rude awakening indeed.

Fired, foreclosed, and fed up, they have had it up to here with the pretensions of our would-be Napoleons and world policemen in both parties. They don't understand why we're shipping billions — billions! — of our tax dollars overseas, to Libya, where they're killing our diplomats, to Egypt, where they're trying to burn down our embassy, and to Israel, where they're trying to blackmail us into fighting yet another war on their behalf.

When will it end? It's a race between the growing anger out in the hinterlands and the growing debt that is destroying our economy. As to which will reach the boiling point first — heck, I'm not Nostradamus, just a humble internet columnist.

(By Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of the Antiwar)

The Hollow Empire
 
Last edited:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
India's new Navy chief pilots 'blue-water' strategy
2012-09-27

India's new Navy chief sits at the helm of an emergent, "blue-water navy" strategically positioning the country's stated aspirations to command a dominant role in the Indian Ocean.

Admiral Devendra Kumar Joshi, 58, replaced retiring Navy chief Admiral Nirmal Kumar Verma on Aug. 31. India's Navy has 123 ships and 11 submarines.

Blue-water navy refers to the ability to exercise sea control at wide ranges. Specifically, the term describes a "maritime force capable of sustained operation across open oceans, project power from the home country and usually includes one or more aircraft carriers," according to U.S. Defense Security.

Naval build up expected

A total of 46 new war ships and submarines are under construction and about 15 are expected to be added to the fleet during Joshi's three-year tenure. :thumb:

Projects slated for the next three years include a Russian-built aircraft carrier, U.S.-built long-range reconnaissance planes, an indigenous nuclear-powered submarine under construction, and a dedicated naval satellite.

The new ships and submarines will add to India's presence as a maritime power and reinforce its capabilities on the high seas.

India's maritime activity is gaining world recognition, marking the period as the country's biggest naval power increase since independence from Britain in 1947.

Visiting India in June, U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta said, "In terms of regional security, our vision is a peaceful Indian Ocean region supported by growing Indian capabilities.

"India is one of the largest and most dynamic countries in the region. "¦ India is at the crossroads of Asia, the crossroads of the new global economy, and at the crossroads of regional security. We will stand with India at those crossroads."

Developments during Joshi's tenure will be watched from both sides of the Pacific Ocean.

Anti-submarine warfare specialist at the helm

Joshi, who was commissioned in 1974, is the 21st chief of the Navy since the country's independence. He is a specialist in anti-submarine warfare and has served in command, staff and instructional appointments.

His experience includes a stint in warship production and acquisition as the assistant controller of the Aircraft Carrier Program [ACCP]. He then worked at the "Operations Branch," first as an assistant chief of naval staff [Information Warfare and Operations] and then as deputy chief of naval staff. Notably, Joshi has been the commander-in-chief of the Andaman and Nicobar Command, the only tri-service integrated command in India.

He went on to serve as the chief of Integrated Defence Staff and was the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Western Naval Command at Mumbai. He served as the defense adviser in the Indian High Commission at Singapore from 1996 to 1999.

A native of Dehradun in the northern state of Uttarakhand, Joshi studied at Hansraj College in New Delhi. He graduated from the U.S. Naval War College in Rhode Island and attended the National Defense College in New Delhi.

Joshi is requesting not only changes to hardware, but infrastructure as well, saying, "We would need to professionally re-audit, train and consolidate preparedness."

Overall expansion plan

In addition to the 46 ships under construction, "acceptance of necessity" for 49 more ships and submarines has been approved by the Indian government. The vessels under construction include an aircraft carrier to be constructed in India along with destroyers, corvettes and six submarines to be constructed in France.

The first to be added to the fleet will be new warships of the existing "Delhi Class" destroyers, starting early next year. The ships feature improved stealth features and weapons. Also under construction are eight new landing craft utility [LCUs] vessels, used in amphibious warfare to augment the fleet in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Bay of Bengal.

The Navy commissioned 15 ships in the past three years, including four stealth frigates, two fleet tankers and eight water jet fast attack craft [WJFAC]. Future plans include a deep submergence and rescue vessel [DSRV], six additional submarines, four Landing Platform Docks and 16 shallow-water anti-submarine warfare [ASW] ships. :thumb:

Last month the Navy issued a request for proposals [RFP] to acquire 56 naval utility helicopters customized for surveillance, anti-submarine warfare, anti-terror, electronic intelligence gathering and search-and-rescue operations. The RFP, which may result in U.S. $1 billion in purchases, has been sent to leading U.S., European and Russian helicopter makers. The Navy has more than 100 helicopters.

Another aircraft carrier on sea trial

India is set to be a two-carrier Navy at the end of the year. [China will catch up soon with one aircraft carrier constructed in Ukraine and undergoing sea trials.] India's new carrier is a refitted Russian craft previously named Admiral Gorshkov. Renamed Indian Naval Ship [INS] Vikramaditya, the vessel has gone through a U.S. $2.35 billion refit program and will have Russian-built MiG 29K fighters flying off its deck. The 49,130-ton carrier started a four-month sea trial in June in the Barents Sea and is slated to join the fleet by the end of the year.

The other carrier, the INS Viraat, is set to be phased out by 2017 and replaced by another carrier being built at a state-owned shipyard in Kochi, Kerala, on India's western seaboard.

Meanwhile, India says the INS Arihant, "the slayer of enemies," will be sea-launched soon. The 6,614-ton nuclear submarine will provide second-strike capability in response to a potential initial enemy nuclear strike. Modeled on the Russian Akula class submarine design, the Arihant is being constructed at Vishakapatnam on the east coast of India.

At an August news conference, Verma, the then-navy chief, said: "Arihant is steadily progressing towards operationalization, and we hope to commence sea trials in the coming months. "¦ Navy is poised to complete the [nuclear] triad, and our maritime and nuclear doctrines will then be aligned to ensure our nuclear insurance comes from the sea."

Long-range reconnaissance aircraft

In November 2008 terrorists used the sea route to reach Mumbai on India's west coast to launch an attack, killing 166 people. In response, the Indian government approved the purchase of 12 long-range reconnaissance planes, the P-8I, produced by Boeing. The first is slated to arrive in January 2013. India operates the Russian origin IL-38 and the Tupelov-142 for long-range reconnaissance at sea.

The P-8I will provide real-time information and can be deployed in locations such as the Indian Naval Air Station, INS Baaz also known as "the Hawk." The P-8I will provide constant updates on the Strait of Malacca and also the "six degree channel" – the main shipping channel between the Indian and Pacific oceans.

The Strait is an important link between European markets and oil in the Gulf on one side, and China, Japan and Korea on the other side. Nearly 70,000 vessels pass through the Strait annually – about 40 percent of all global trade. :ranger:

In conjunction with the Indian Space Research Organization, the Navy is slated to launch a communications satellite that will provide communications among all its warships, helicopters, aircraft and submarines.

INDIA'S NEW NAVY CHIEF PILOTS 'BLUE-WATER' STRATEGY - Asia Pacific Defense Forum in English
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
F-16 vs MiG-29

Both the F-16 and the MiG-29 were designed to correct mistakes and shortcomings of previous aircraft. With the USAF it was the low kill ratios over Vietnam as well as the lack of complete air superiority over the battle field a feat that was achieved with great success both over the battlefield's of Europe and Korea where the US Army was able to operate under little threat of air attack. With the Russians they wanted an aircraft that would perform the same roles as the MiG-25 and the Su-27 but at a shorter range. As well as an aircraft that for the first time could match Western fighters in ACM, while maintaining the ability to operate as an interceptor. Thus the MiG-29 became a smaller and shorter range F-15 while the F-16 became a larger and longer range F-5.

Both teams designed craft that were cleared to operations of 9g and made use of wing-body blending to increase internal volume , reduce weight and improve maneuverability. They both located the intakes close to structures to reduce the AoA (angle of attack) sensed at the face of the intake/s thus increasing the AoA that the aircraft could take in comparison to other aircraft of their day. With the F-16A the AoA limit is 25deg where as the MiG-29 has been cleared of an AoA of up to 45deg. :thumb:

One of the major differences was in the engine arrangement with the General Dynamics team choosing a single P&W F100 this gave commonality with the F-15 and lower fuel consumption. In contrast the Mikoyan team choose a twin arrangement of the RD-33 with no thought give to using the Saturn/Lyulka AL-31F as used in the Su-27. The reasoning being that the use of two engines gave the aircraft greater survivability as the MiG-23/27's suffered a greater attrition ratio then the MiG-25. With the intakes the GD team adopted a fixed geometry intake as high mach number capability was not required for the role that the F-16 was to fill, while the requirement for a dash speed of mach 2.3+ led Mikoyan to adopt a two dimensional , four shock , variable geometry intake with one fixed ramp and two moving ramps.

In regard to FOD (foreign object damage) the GD team took the position that FOD would not be a problem as the F-16 would operate form swept, paved runways. Where as the Russians felt that a rough field capability was an important capability and as such devised two movable ramps over the intakes to prevent FOD while on the ground or at low speed at low level. When the intakes are closed the engines breath via auxiliary intakes on the upper surface of the wing. :ranger:

The F-16 has incorporated a number of features that are intended to enhance combat effectiveness. The pilot's seat is inclined at 30deg rather than the normal 13deg , he also has a side stick controller which allows the pilots arm to be supported this has not met with universal approval as some pilots prefer to be able to fly with either hand. The F-16 also for the first time incorporated a Fly-By-Wire flight control system, this allowed the aircraft to be made inherently unstable and would greatly improve maneuverability in air-combat. While the MiG introduced the first HMS (helmet-mounted sight) and IRST (infra-red search and track) sensor with a laser range finder for passive attacks and missile engagements up to 45deg off-borsight but maintained a conventional flight control system and achieved high maneuverability mainly due advanced aerodynamics. i.e. The tail of the MiG-29 is said to have been positioned to take advantage of the four vortices by the wing and fuselage. :ranger:

In combat provided that the MiG-29's 7.5g above 0.85 mach can be avoided it should beat any F-16 due to its BVR capability , higher thrust/weight ratio and lower wing loading. While in recent exercises between USAF F-16 and German MiG-29A's showed that in ACM the greatest advantage the MiG-29 had was it's helmet mounted sight coupled with the AA-11 Archer which gives it a kill zone greater than any aircraft serving. F-16 pilots found that any aircraft within 45deg's of the nose of a MiG-29 was always under grave threat. :thumb: The ability to target aircraft well of boresight has proved to be such a success that helmet mounted sights have become requirements on any new fighter program.

While both aircraft have short-commings those of the MiG-29 have effectively been solved with newer versions ( MiG-29 S/M/K and MiG-33 ) which have increased the fuel capacity of the MiG as well as adding an in-flight refueling system. The number of hard points has also been increased by two and the max warload has been doubled, along with the inclusion of a fly-by-wire flight control system and a new radar that allowed two targets to be engaged simultaneously with the new AA-12 Adder active radar missile as well as full clearance for flight at 9 g's . Most of these upgrades have been offered to current users of the MiG-29 with the Russian and Indian airforces conducting some upgrades. :thumb:

The F-16 by comparison has had few of it's problems solved in the past few years. One of it's greatest drawbacks the lack of a BVR capability was solved with the clearance of the AMRAAM for use on the F-16 but the second major problem of insufficient wing area on the F-16C has never been solved.

Vayu Sena - F-16 versus MiG-29
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
,
Comparative Effectiveness of "Super Sukhoi" SU30mki/ SU35BM with F35/F15SE :thumb:

F-35 defeated in air combat simulation

September 7, 2011 (by Eric L. Palmer) - An unnamed source stated that earlier this year a presentation was given by an industry air combat threat assessment expert to defense officials of a NATO country which showed that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) would not survive air combat against threats it is likely to see in its alleged service lifetime. :tsk:

Part of the presentation showed a computer simulation which calculated that the F-35 would be consistently defeated by the Russian-made SU-35 fighter aircraft. The defeat calculated by the scenario also showed the loss of the F-35's supporting airborne-early warning and air-to-air refueling aircraft.

The technology in the SU-35 will also see its way into growth upgrades of other SU-fighter variants used by countries like Indonesia, India, Malaysia and Vietnam. Chinese variants of these aircraft should also see similar growth capability in the coming years. :thumb: (to "Super Sukhoi" standard)

The Russian-made T-50, PAK-FA low-observable fighter now in development is expected to be much more lethal than the SU-35 in air-to-air combat against the U.S. made F-35. The SU-35 and T-50 made appearances this year at the Russian aerospace industry air show known as MAKS2011. Both aircraft will include sensors and networking which can minimise the effects of the limited low-observable qualities of the F-35. They will also have higher performance and carry more air-to-air weapons than an F-35.

The F-35 defeat briefing runs counter to the claims by the Lockheed Martin corporation that the F-35 will be a go-it-alone aircraft in high threat situations (brief to Israel, 2007) or that it will be "8 times" more effective than "legacy" aircraft in air-to-air combat.

In 2009, then U.S. Secretary of Defense Mr. Gates was successful in halting additional production of the F-22 which is the only aircraft that can take on emerging threats. His reasoning was that the F-35—built in numbers—would be sufficient to fill any strategic gaps in air power deterrence for the U.S. and its allies.

There was never any robust strategic study performed by the U.S. Department of Defense to verify Gates theory.

Since Gates endorsement of the troubled F-35 program, it has continued with its history of cost blow-outs and delay and is unlikely to see a large number built.

If Gates is wrong, he will have helped put the the air power deterrent capability of the U.S. and its allies at significant risk in the coming years. According to the assumptions of the joint operational requirement of the F-35 signed off on in 2000, the F-35 was not supposed to take on high-end threats. The requirement assumed that there would be hundreds of combat-ready F-22s. With the F-22 program ending, the maximum number of combat-ready F-22s will be somewhere between 120 and 140.

Independent air combat analysts from Air Power Australia have also stated that the F-35 is not capable of facing high end threats; that what will be delivered (if it ever arrives) will be obsolete; and that the F-35 is not affordable or sustainable.

A recent briefing by Australian Defence officials, while showing support for the F-35 program, admitted that it will cost more to operate than the F-18 Hornet. A separate U.S. Navy study also agreed. This is counter to the claim by Lockheed Martin, that the F-35 will be cheaper to operate than existing aircraft it is planned to replace.

In 2012, Australian Defence will decide to put down money for its first order of F-35s or to go ahead with a "plan-B" that could include purchase of 24 more F-18 Super Hornets made by Boeing. The Super Hornet is also unable to take on high-end threats in the Pacific Rim region in the coming years.

http://www.f-16.net/news_article4416.html
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Exercise Red Flag 2008-4 / Su-30MKI vs F-15, F-16, F-22

SU30mki Vs F15

Red Flag 2008-4 : Lecture by USAF Col. Terrence Fornof

Introduction

After participating with the USAF in a number of exercises in Cope India and Cope Thunder series, the Indian Air Force sent its top of the line Su-30MKIs to Exercise Red Flag in August 2008. Red Flag is world famous for its complex and realistic war gaming and is a coveted training opportunity for pilots.

Red Flag 2008 saw USAF's first encounter with Su-30MKI – the most advanced Su-27 Flanker derivative is service anywhere in the world. The results of the exercise were highly anticipated. Following the exercise, a two part video of a USAF officer delivering a lecture to a knowledgeable, but unknown audience emerged on youtube creating a sensation of sorts among watchers on the internet given that the pilot was sharing firsthand experience unhindered by official rules which limit the detail that is to be shared with media.

An inexact transcript and the video follows, followed by comments and analysis. Most of the words have been paraphrased so do look at the video as well.


Discussion on the Su-30MKI. I stands for 'Indian', 'Su-30M' is the Russian designation for theie newest fighter and 'K' means that its an export version. These were version five airplanes, they had vectored thrust, canards, all the advanced weapons the Russians build, including the AMRAAMSKI – their active radar missile, and the R-73 which is there IR missile, which has a 30 mile range on it. Nothing classified, everything I say can be found in Janes website.

We had them here at Mountain Home for two weeks where we told them how to fly for Red Flag. And a couple of things happened.

Firstly, the Tumansky engines are very suseptible to FOD (Foreign Object Damage). Now the reason thats a big deal is because they asked for a 1 minute spacing between take offs. At Red Flag with nearly 50-60 aircraft supposed to take off, if you have one person who will wait one minute between each take off to launch these six aircraft... yeah.... right, they can go find some other place to fly. So we trained with them, worked with them, and got them to shorten that down to 45 seconds, still not acceptable. But what we did was send these guys out first and ask them to wait for everyone else, since they had enough gas fuel, they would go up and wait for everyone else. They were very concerned about FOD and how Russian engines are not nearly as reliable as Americans. One of the things the Indians were very disapointed in, if an engine breaks down because of FOD, the Russians make them send the engine back to Russia, then you'll send you back a new one. So its not the ideal situation for them here in the United States because they have no spare engines here.

How did they Fly? There is a lot of stuff on the subject in the newspapers and magazines about this airplane. There's a great video on youtube, where somebody shows the F-22 flying its demo, and the Su-30MK, side by side, and he does the exact same demonstration, as the F-22. And an airshow, then can do the same demonstration. The reality is, that's about as close as the airplanes ever get. When you compare it with US airplanes; where does it stand up against the F-16 and F-15, it's a tad bit better than we are. And that's pretty impressive, it has better radar, more thrust, vectored thrust, longer ranged weapons, so it's pretty impressive. The Sukhoi is a tad bit better (holds arm at chest level, and the other arm signifying the Sukhoi a wee bit higher). But now compare with the F-22 Raptor, the raptor is here. (holds palm way above his head - signifying that the aircraft is much better). OK, next.

Now coming to the maneuvering. We did a lot of 1 to 1 fighting with it.... and we were very concerned, because in Cope Indias when we went over to India and fought them, they always had their best pilots. We always fought them at the 'Indian Nellis' and they always had their best pilots flying. We always had our operational unit based out of Kadena where the experience ratio is 80% inexperienced guys with less than 500hrs flying time and 20% experienced. The 20% were fairly experienced but they came back from a staff jobs so they really hadn't had a lot of time flying. Anyway at Cope India, we held our own, but the Indians pounded their chests - they said we beat them more than they beat us – and that was true there. :drunk:

Now they come to Mountain Home, and the Su-30 unit that they bring was a regular operational unit – with an experience mix of about 50-50 (experienced vs inexperienced). Their experienced guys had all come off the MiG-21 Bison.. The MiG-21 bison is a pretty neat airplane. It is based on the MiG-21 as many of you guys know from the Vietnam (War) era, but upgraded with an F-16 radar built by the Israelis in the nose, active radar missile, and they carry an Israeli jammer on it would practically make them invisible to our legacy radar in the F-15 and F-16.

Remember days in 4477th (4477 Test and Evaluation Squadron)... MiG-21 had the capability to get into the scissors with you, 110 knots, 60 degrees nose high, go from 10,000 feet to 20,000 feet, very manoeuvrable airplane, but it didn't have any good weapons. Now it has high off bore sight Archer missile, helmet mounted sight, active missile, and a jammer that gets it into the merge, good radar, so that's the plane the SU-30 experienced pilots came out of and they were pretty good in the engaged fight.

Well we get them to Mountain Home and we let the operational guys fight... and then a couple of things happened. Amazingly, we dominated - not with a clean F-15 i.e. Without any wingtanks and other stores, but we dominated with an F-15 in wartime configuration i.e. 4 missiles onboard, wingtanks, and they're sitting there in clean Su-30s except for pylons which did not have anything on it except a ACMI pod. They were amazed, matter of fact they were floored to the point after the first 3 days, they didn't want any more 1 vs 1 stuff. Lets move on the something else (laughs). Funny 'cause in India, they wanted only 1 to 1 - cause they were winning at that. :laugh:

A quick word on the airplane. Vectored thrust. The Raptor has vectored thrust, but its two dimensional and works only in the pitch mode. When the airplane pulls, and it gets past a certain AoA (Angle of Attack), the vectored thrust kicks in and drives the airplane around. In the Su-30, instead of having it in the pitch, it has TVC in a V. It doesnt have to be in a post stall manoevering.... the TVC would kick in and push the aircraft the direction when the pilot engages the switch on the stick. All this is formidable on paper but what you would know is that with the TVC kicking in, its a huge aircraft, and thrusting such a huge aircraft in that direction creates a lot of drag. It's a biiig airplane. A huge airplane. So what happens is when it moves its nose around, its sinking. We had enough experience with the F-22. which has up/down TVC nozzles.

What would happen is that the in a merge with the F-22... From our experience, that's the only way you would get the F-22. and the only way - this happens only if there is an inexperienced pilot because the experienced ones never make the mistake. You would be pulling in scissor fight hoping you would get the F-22 in your sights (laughs ). The F22 can sustain a turn rate of 28 deg per second at 20,000 feet while the F-15 can get an instantaneous rate of 21 and a sustained rate of 15-16 degrees. So you are pulling and hoping. Post stall, maneuver, the ass end drops and instead of going up, it just drops in mid air and the airplane will rotate with its nose up. This is where the Eagle or Viper pilot would pull up vertical, switch to guns, then come down and take a shot at the F-22. Of course you have to first get in close to do this, most probably the F-22 will kill you before that.

The Su-30? No problem. Big airplane. Big cross section. Jamming to get to the merge, so you have to fight close... he has 22 - 23 degrees per second sustained turn rate. We've been fighting the Raptor, so we've been going oh dude, this is easy. So as we're fighting him, all of a sudden you'd see the ass end kick down, going post stall - but now he starts falling from the sky. The F-15 wouldn't even have to pull up. slight pull up on the stick, engage guns, come down and drill his brains out.

While on paper, he has vectored thrust, all these great weapons and everything, he looks the same as a Raptor, he's nowhere near the same. So that was a really good thing for us to find out, that we really didn't know until this last excercise. Now, what I'm scared of, is congress is going to hear that and go 'great we don't need to buy any more airplanes... no no no, we used to be way ahead of them, now they're right up close to us and just a little bit higher. I say that they're just a little bit better than us, is because when there pilots learn how to fly, they'll be able to beat the F-16 and F-15, on a regular basis. Right now, they use TVC and just go into post stall.... so it's only a matter of time before they learn. :toilet:

As far as the Red Flag went, we also had the French out here. The French were going to get the Mirage 2000 dash 5, one of their older airplanes, but the moment they knew the Indians were getting the Sukhois they decided to send the Rafales - their latest, advanced jet. 90% of the time, they followed the Indians in, but they never really came into the merge. Like anyone of you who has flown in Desert Storm (Iraq) and Afghanistan, they would do local flights over Bagram, Bahrain and Alseraj and say we participated, but what they were really doing is just sniffing electronically and finding out how our radars work. And that's really all they did out here.... came out here with all the electronic receiving equipments and sucked out all the trons in the air.

One thing about the IAF - they learnt their lessons very well at Mountain Home, they were extremely professional - they never flew out of the airspace which we were very concerned about. They had zero training rule violations. And that in itself was incredible. We were very impressed and thanked them so much because they were very very professional.

Where they had problems was they killed a lot of friends. Red Flag has changed now, the first week of Red Flag is basically large force deployment and the second week is about a campaign.... where the surface to air missiles come up. What was happening was that they did not have combat I.D capability.

The Koreans bought in their brand spankin' new F-15Ks. beautiful aircraft, with AESA radar and all like on the F-22. Had Israeli targeting and jamming pods on them. Incredible airplanes. Very professional also. But they had less than 50 hours total on the F-15 it and none on the airplane, they were still learning the aircraft. So it did not have any significant impact.

You know what was happening is that they didn't have the datalink with the Awacs. Big internet data links. The Koreans, the French and us could see the complete picture on the HUD, but the IAF had to ask the AWACS. they would ask about a target ahead, "Contact on my nose 22 miles, friendly or hostile?" Awacs would say "No hostile within 40 miles of you" then "Fox2." (laughs) The first two days they got hit bad, they were getting shot down while waiting for answers so they decided to kill the other guy fast without knowing.. better you die than me. So they had a fairly high number of fratricides. But they took the fratricides very seriously.

So while Nellis is about training with people who we will go to war with, Red Flag Alaska: This is different from Red Flag Nellis. In Alaska we exercise for friendship building. Most countries that fly there are in a conflict with each other. The Indians really wanted to participate in Red Flag Nellis, so they could mix right in and be a part of the coalition, and they learned, in a big way, that, that, wouldn't happen.

Was the AESA radar in the Indian aircraft...? Well the Indian is PESA which is not active but passive, as opposed to AESA. Huge difference, because and actively scanned AESA pings more, and sees more, and is more accurate, than just a passively scanned radar. PESA is good but ends up having more technical problems in discriminating, and finding the right guy.

Some guy said F-15 was last dog fighting airplane, he discounted the fact the F-22 was really terrific in the fight...? I think the Raptor is the next great dogfighter we have. Reason is, electronic jamming, and not only electronic jamming, but we don't carry enough missiles. We're going to have to go in with guns. Gonna happen and thank god the Raptor still has a gun on it. It's fast, its manoeuvrable, .... and the Block 50 (and 52 EHRM P&W FTW), is pretty good dogfighter also, so these aircraft, the F-15, Block 50 F-16, and the Raptor, are still very capable aircraft, because when the Bison MiG-21 that gets in unseen with the small RCS and a big jamming pod.... going to need manoeuvrability. :wave:

What about the F-35? Let's save that for another discussion. We do too much work on it at this moment, but we'll save that for another time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the speaker

Colonel Terrence Fornof (Colonel is equivalent to a Group Captain in the IAF) is an F-15 pilot and the Director of the Requirements and Testing office at the United States Air Force Warfare Center, Nellis AFB, Nevada. The lecture above is a private briefing in August 2008 to a group called the "Daedalians". The Daedalians are a local group of retired military pilots.

Per the press statement handed out by Nellis AFB: "Col. Fornof did not mean to offend any U.S. allied forces, as he knows firsthand the importance of training with allied forces and the awesome firepower they bring to the fight. His comments during this briefing were his personal opinions and not those of U.S. Air Force Warfare Center or of the Air Force."

Comments and Analysis

Despite Col. Fornof having observed Red Flag up close, his comments should not be treated as the gospel truth - there is a possibility that he is 'playing to the gallery'. His comments are noteworthy since he is an operational pilot with the USAF but he certainly cannot cover the entire exercise and has no inside knowledge of the way IAF 'fought'. The comments initially appear to be negative about the IAF to the uninformed listener; overall he has actually praised the IAF and its performance.

The Su-30MKI did not use the data link in the exercise unlike the other air forces. The reason being the HAL supplied system is not compatible with NATO data links – neither is the system required to be compatible with NATO. The speaker clearly mentions that the high fratricide ratio in the kills was because of this reason. While NATO air forces are designed to inter operate with each other and carry out joint missions, the IAF is not.

Su-30MKI is equipped with its own data link which can share target information across multiple fighters. IAF is presently inducting A-50EI Phalcon AEW&C aircraft. Red Flag and other exercises before it have seen IAF working very closely with the AWACS crew of the other air force. Operational Data Link (ODL) will be provided to all fighters in the IAF over the coming years.

The IFF system used by IAF is not compatible with NATO standard, hence the need for verbal communication with the controller.

The aircraft were operating their radars on training mode since the actual signals with which the Bars radar operates are kept secret.

The high mix of highly experienced pilots in Ex Cope India, if true, cannot be consistent across all sqns that were involved in the exercise. During Cope India, the 24 Sqn operating Su-30K/MK was first Flanker unit in the IAF and only one of two Su-30 units in the entire IAF at that time. To find a concentration of senior pilots in these squadrons will not be unexpected given that these units will be forging doctrines and tactics and building up a pool of pilots. Per article on Cope India here; "Nor did U.S. pilots believe they faced only India's top guns. Instead, they said that at least in some units they faced a mix of experienced and relatively new Indian fighter and strike pilots.". Moreover, the mix of experience needs to be examined for the USAF squadrons as well. The aggressor squadron at Nellis and the F-22 attracts the best in the USA.

Soviet era aircraft were designed to operate from poorly prepared airfields. For example; MiG-29 closes its intakes during taxi and take-off to avoid ingestion of FOD thrown up by the front wheels. In this state the engines are supplied air thru louvres located on upper surface of the leading edge. This design feature is at the cost of significant internal fuel capacity and hence has been eliminated in newer MiG-29 versions starting with the K/KUB variants. Flanker come with lighter anti-FOD grills in the intakes as well as wheel fenders that catch FOD. IAF has precautions built into their SOPs – which may be overlooked in case of war or any such exigency. Since the deployment was far away from home base in the USA, with no spares support and related infrastructure it was well worth to observe strict adherence to SOPs instead to being stuck with a grounded aircraft!

This is not the first time the MiG-21 Bison has been praised for successes during dissimilar air combat training (DACT) – even during previous USAF exercise and internal IAF exercises pilots are known to have scored 'kills' against more advanced adversaries. The small size (lower visual signature) and inherently small radar cross section coupled with modern avionics, radar, effective jammers, precision guided munitions and missiles (R-73, R-77) make Bison one of the best fighters in IAF after Su-30 and Mirage-2000. IAF's has had good experience with small jets such as Gnat which earned the reputation of "Sabre Slayer" in the 1965 war with Pakistan. The under-development LCA Tejas promises to carry on this legacy when it replaces the Bison.

Observations by Vishnu Som

Mr. Vishnu Som is an Indian journalist who was reporting on the exercise.

As the only Indian journalist who spent a lengthy period of time at Nellis after being granted permission by both the Indian Air Force and the US Air Force, I was granted access to impeccable sources in both forces.

Whats more, I was able to independently corroborate this information with reliable, alternative sources.

For starters ... and this cannot be stressed enough ... the Red Flag exercises were a brilliant learning experience for all the participants, not least of all the Indian Air Force which, over a period of time, has earned the reputation of being one of the world's finest operational air forces.

This was a reputation which was reinforced at Red Flag 2008, the world's most advanced air combat exercises where the Indian Air Force fielded a number of state of the art Sukhoi 30 MKI jets in addition to IL-76 transports and IL-78 mid air refuellers.

For other participants at the Red Flag exercises ... namely the South Korean Air Force, French and US Air Force ... the opportunity to train with a platform such as the Sukhoi 30 MKI was an opportunity which just couldn't be missed. This has a lot to do not just with the jet but also with the air force operating the fighter, a force which has made a mark as an innovative operator of fast jets. The US Air Force "¦ the host of these exercises "¦ was singularly gracious in its appreciation for the Indian Air Force contingent which came into Red Flag having trained extensively for the exercises not only back home but also at the Mountain Home Air Force base in the US.

Contrary to unsolicited remarks by certain serving US personnel not directly linked to day to day operations at the exercises "¦ the Indian Air Force and its Su-30s more than made a mark during their stint in the United States. For starters "¦ not a single Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter was `shot down' in close air combat missions at the Mountain Home air base. In fact, none of the Sukhois were even close to being shot down in the 10 odd one on one sorties which were planned for the first two days of the exercises at Mountain Home. These one on one engagements featured USAF jets such as the F-15 and F-16 in close air engagements against the Su-30 MKI. The majority of the kills claimed in these engagements were granted to the Indian Air Force with the remainder of these being no-results. Indian Air Force Sukhois did use their famed thrust vectoring in these one on one engagements. Contrary to what may have been reported elsewhere "¦ the Su-30 has a rate of turn of more than 35 degrees when operating in the thrust vector mode. In certain circumstances, this goes up substantially.

By the time the exercises at Mountain Home had matured "¦ the Indian Air Force had graduated to large formation exercises which featured dozens of jets in the sky. In one of these exercises "¦ the blue forces, of which the Indian Air Force was a part "¦ shot down more than 21 of the enemy jets. Most of these `kills' have been credited to the Indian Air Force. :thumb:

By the time the Indian Air Force was ready for Red Flag, the contingent had successfully worked up using the crawl, walk, run principle. At Red Flag though, they found themselves at a substantial disadvantage vis a vis the other participants since they were not networked with AWACS and other platforms in the same manner in which USAF or other participating jets were. In fact, Indian Air Force Sukhois were not even linked to one another using their Russian built data links since American authorities had asked for specifics of the system before it was cleared to operate in US airspace. The IAF, quite naturally, felt that this would compromise a classified system onboard and decided to go on with the missions without the use of data links between the Sukhois.Neither was the Indian Air Force allowed to use chaff or flares, essential decoys to escape incoming missiles which had been fired by enemy jets. This was because the US FAA had visibility and pollution related concerns in the event that these were used in what is dense, busy air space in the Las Vegas region.

The Red Flag exercises themselves were based on large force engagements and did not see the Indian Air Force deploy thrust vectoring at all on any of the Sukhoi 30 jets not that this was required since the engagements were at long ranges. Though it is true that there were 4-5 incidents of fratricides involving the Indian Air Force at Red Flag "¦ it is important to point out the following: In the debriefs that followed the exercises "¦ responsibility for the fratricides were always put on the fighter controllers not the pilots. Its also important to point that unlike in Mountain Home, none of the Indian Air Force's own fighter controllers were allowed to participate since there was classified equipment at Nellis used for monitoring the exercises. The lack of adequate controlling and the fact that Nellis fighter controllers often had problems understanding Indian accents (they had problems understanding French accents as well) resulted in a lack of adequate controlling in situations. Whats more "¦ given the fact that the availability of AWACS was often low "¦ the bulk of fratricides took place on days when the AWACS jet was not deployed. Whats important to remember though is that US participants in these exercises had a similar number of fratricides despite being fully linked in with data links and the latest IFF systems.

So was the Indian Air Force invincible at Red Flag. In a word "¦ no. So yes, there were certainly days in which several Sukhoi jets were shot down. And there were others when they shot down many opposing jets. Ultimately though "¦ the success of the Indian Air Force at Red Flag lay in the fact that they could meet their mission objectives as well, if not better, than any other participant. Despite the hot weather conditions, the IAF had a 95 per cent mission launch ratio, far better than some of the participants. And no one went into the exercises thinking the score line would be a perfect one in favour of the IAF. In fact "¦ the IAF went into these exercises with an open mind and with full admiration of the world beating range at Nellis with an unmatched system of calibrating engagement results.Perhaps the most encouraging part of these exercises comes from the fact that the Indian Air Force's young pilots "¦ learnt from their mistakes, analysed, appreciated and came back strong. Mistakes were not repeated. In fact "¦ the missions where the IAF did not fare well turned out to be immense learning experiences. At the end of the exercises "¦ its more than clear that the IAF's Su-30s were more than a match for the variants of the jets participating at the Red Flag exercises. Considering the fact that the central sensor of the Sukhoi, its radar "¦ held up just fine in training mode "¦despite the barrage of electronic jamming augurs well for the Indian Air Force.

The complete article is available here.

Observations by Pushpindar Singh Chopra.

Mr. PS Chopra is the Editor of Vayu Aerospace Review.

The IAF did not undertake any IvIs at Nellis during Red Flag, nor did they engage thrust vectoring during the Exercise. IvIs were flown only at Mountain Home AFB. In none of the IvIs were the Su-30MKIs ever vulnerable, let alone shot down. As all exercises were flown with ACMI, the situations are recorded and available to substantiate this aspect. Additionally, the MKI's behaviour with thrust vectoring is dramatically different from that described by the Colonel. F-15 and F-16 aircrew were well appreciative of IAF manoeuvres with thrust vectoring.

Colonel Fornof's statement on Su-30MKI rates of turn with thrust vectoring (20o/ sec) is grossly 'out' but apparently gives away actual F-22 performance (28o/sec). Pitch of the talk seemed as to whether thrust vectoring was important or not. As all sorties were with ACMI, entire profiles are recorded, can be analysed and surely would have been replayed to drive the point home and make the 'chest thumping' sound more real. Apparently this was not done. Perhaps, as the Colonel is aware of F-22 data, he has tried to down play the Su-30MKI in comparison. Surprisingly, while there was no systems / avionics / comparison between the two types or with any other type of 'legacy' aircraft, the speaker does admit that radar of the MKI is 'superior' to that of the F-15 and F-16, however 'inferior' to AESA of the F-22 (a correct assessment). However, the IAF used the Su-30's radar in the training mode, with downgraded performance vis-à-vis operational mode, as they could hardly participate without this primary sensor

Fratricide by IAF fighters : this is correct, the IAF did 'shoot down' some 'friendlies' and that was assessed and attributed to the IAF not being networked. However, what the Colonel did not bring out were the two essential reasons for this. Firstly, this occurred mainly when the AWACS was not available (unserviceable) and controlling was done by GCI. More significantly it happened during extremely poor controlling by their operators, this fact being acknowledged during debriefs and the controllers being admonished accordingly. 'Accents' were perhaps the main culprit here, which very often led to American controllers not being able to understand Indian calls.

Now hear this : the F-15C and other USAF fighters had the same number of fratricides as the IAF ! Considering they are well networked, yet their pilots shot down the same number of 'friendlies'. This was not only a major concern but also turned out to be a major source of embarrassment as the USAF had everything -- Link 16, IFF Mode 4 etc and the IAF had nothing. Under the Rules of Engagement, they did not even permit the IAF to use data link within themselves. All cases of USAF fratricide were covered in the next day's mass briefing as lessons learnt by concerned aircrew. In the IAF, the incidents were covered by concerned controllers, and attributed to lack of adequate integration, excessive R/T congestion and poor controlling. Gloating on cases of IAF fratricide is frivolous and unprofessional.

However, Colonel Fornof did appreciate IAF 'professionalism' and that the IAF were able to dovetail with USAF procedures within short time. There was not a single training rule / airspace violation. This is a most important aspect.

Since the Colonel could hardly tell his audience that the IAF had given the USAF good run for their money, they downplayed the Su-30's capability. It is correct that the IAF aircrew included some very young pilots -- nearly 70 percent - but they adapted rapidly to the environment (totally alien), training rules (significantly different), airspace regulations etc but to say that they were unable to handle the Su-30 in its envelope (something that they have been practicing to do for four to five years) is just not credible ! If young pilots can adapt to new rules and environment within a short span of two weeks, it is because they are extremely comfortable and confident of their aircraft.

The IAF's all round performance was publicly acknowledged during, and at end of the Exercise, specifically by those involved. Not a single TR / airspace violation was acknowledged. Mission achievement rate was in excess of 90%. The drop out / mission success rates of all others, inclusive of USAF, were significantly lower. This is of major significance considering the fact that IAF was sustaining operations 20,000 km away from home base while the USAF were at home base. (The 8 Su-30s flew some 850 hrs during the deployment, which is equivalent to four months of flying task in India over 75 days). IAF's performance at Mountain Home AFB was even better that that at Nellis AFB.

FOD : At Mountain Home, IAF had reduced departure intervals from the very beginning (30" seconds) considering that operating surfaces were very clean. However, a few minor nicks were encountered and it was decided to revert to 60 seconds rather than undertake engine changes. This was communicated by the IAF at the very start (IPC itself).

There is no need to go in for 'kill ratios' as that would be demeaning. However, the IAF had significant edge throughout and retained it. In fact the true lesson for the USAF should be : 'do not field low value legacy equipment against the Su-30MKI' !. (demeaning or otherwise, it is understood that the kill ratio (at Mountain Home AFB) was 21 : 1, in favour of the Su-30MKIs). :thumb:

Exercise Red Flag 2008-4 / Su-30MKI vs F-15, F-16, F-22
 
Last edited by a moderator:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
The latest calculation of Military Strength by GFP is as below, in terms of PwrIndx, to get our war purposes. it is one of the most recognized source of measuring military strength of world so we may have a look on it :ranger:

Global Firepower Military Ranks - 2013

few senior members here would be agree with me that US was having PwrIndx at around '0.11' in 2005, sometimes around it if I remember. while its now '0.2461'? so sharp change in just 6-7 years, along with twice indebted economy and having lost most of the technological superiority ::tsk:

=> along with US+EU report as below,

The Hindu : News : U.S. report says India third most powerful nation
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Arms purchased by India in 2012 :thumb:

yesterday I said that India buy as much defence arms every year, which is enough to take over a country of size Australia. I mean, having a look on the big size of Australia with hardly '24' Super Hornet working in their arsenal, (old SHs, around 55, have serious maintenance issues, can't work), along with mere 50,000 troops and limited naval arms which struggle to fight with boat people only, ....... then here we may say that India buy as much arms 'every year' which is enough to take over a country of size Australia...... a country like Australia in Indian Ocean is nothing but a lollipop for India, China :smokin:

(the list below includes just 4.5/4++ generation Combat Aircrafts of the number 21+ 12+ 9 = 42 :thumb:)

=> Total Russian Arms Purchased by India in 2012

2012-01-21

According to the Russian world arms trade center site on 20 January reported that Russia will continue to be India's first year major source of arms for the country. It is estimated that Russia and India in 2012 on weapons and military equipment exports will total about $ 7.7 billion, is expected to account for the total amount of Russian arms exports to over 60% of India's arms imports accounted for about 80%. However, from 2013, Russia and India as the largest source of arms for the country's position will be replaced by the United States.

Russian World Weapons Analysis Center released U.S. report shows that Russian-Indian military-technical cooperation in the field this year will implement a number of major trading scheme. It should be noted that a considerable part of the transaction which is based on a previous contract implementation. Among them, one of the highest value end of the year was undoubtedly the Russian deliveries to the Indian Navy, "Admiral Gorshkov" aircraft carrier. For modernization of the cost of the ship has been changed several times and eventually freeze-frame 23.4 billion. The second major deal between Russia and India for the delivery of two 1135.6 frigate, with a total value of about $ 1 billion. Russia ranked third in the transaction in January this year for the Indian Navy to lease a 971-type submarines. According to the latest news, the amount of the transaction will involve up to $ 920 million.

Russia and India according to finalize the delivery schedule, Russia will be delivered to India in 2012, more 40 m-17V-5 type of military transport helicopters, 21 Su-30MKI (signed in 2000, according to contract to license the assembly), 12 Su-30MKI (according to the 2007 supply contracts signed) and nine carrier-based fighter aircraft MiG -29K/KUB. In addition, this year, Russia and India will continue serving on the Indian MiG-29 fighter jets, Figure -142 patrol aircraft, helicopters Mi-17 upgrade and maintenance of 877EM submarine contract. At the same time, Russia will provide card-31 shipborne helicopters, AL-55-and TRDD-50MT engine, "club-S" anti-ship missile systems, Mi-17 helicopter training simulator, the assembly authorized the Indian T-90S a series of main battle tanks and other contracts.

be noted that, with a number of major sales contracts, the United States from 2013 to replace Russia as India's largest source of arms for the country. The United States plans to provide arms and equipment to India, including P-8I anti-submarine patrol aircraft, C-17A large military transport aircraft, AH-64D "Longbow" helicopters. The correlation between the US-India arms contract will be implemented between 2013-2015.

It is estimated that the United States to India in 2013, the total value of arms exports will reach $ 3.06 billion (the amount of Russian arms sales to India over the same period is expected to be only $ 2.03 billion), $ 3.7 billion in 2014 (Russian side of 22.3 billion U.S. dollars) in 2015 to $ 2.47 billion ($ 1.95 billion Russian). However, generally will be, taking into account Russia's 2012 arms sales to India's huge, Russia in 2012-2016, India will remain among the most important arms supplier, the arms trade between the two countries will total $ 15.6 billion.

According to statistics, in 2002-2011, the Russian arms exports to India amounted to $ 14,780,000,000. During the same period, the United States is the only weapon in India's fourth largest source country (16.6 million). In addition to Russian-US two countries, Israel, India, another major source of arms for the country. In the 2002-2011 years, the Indian arms exports to $ 3.7 billion, the latter is the fourth largest arms supplier. In between 2012-2016, to arms exports to India will reach $ 2.62 billion.

in the implementation of a number of contracts have been signed at the same time, India is actively bidding weapons. According to statistics, printed on the bidding between 2012-2016 the total value of the weapons and equipment will reach $ 11.2 billion. Overall, India between 2012-2016 funds for the import of weapons and equipment will reach $ 51.4 billion. (Compass)

Russian media: United States next year will replace Russia as India's largest source of weapons | Military of China, force comment.
 
Last edited:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
=> yesterday I discussed, how Russia rolled its tanks over Georgia when EU made noise but they could do just nothing as Russia, along with China and India too, are too powerful to be handled. just see the posts of Chinese members here, they generally come with the pictures showing 1000s of aircrafts, tanks, military vehicles etc, and even if Chinese arms are considered little inferior, certainly this big force can't be handled until whole EU puts its total strength together, with unity......:wave:

same like the above news, with number of missile tests by India, mainly Agni-5, Missile Defence etc, with having even production line of top arms like LCA Tejus which is now producing LCA mk1 too, along with many other defence projects.... yesterday I said that production line of SU30mki will run until Rafale will start its delivery. we hope at least 30 more Mig29ks, apart from 45 on the current contract, which will make its production line run until production line of LCA mk2 will start, hopefully since 2015/16. similarly, F35/JSF would start its delivery to EU/US from 2018+ and at the same time production line of PAK FA would start in Russia+India........

and this is how India buy just Combat Aircrafts, along with 1-2 frigates/destroyers/submarines etc every year, running production line of T90 tanks etc, with a significant number of front line missiles of world bla bla.......


=> I also said that, we find even Britain type country has hardly '90' Eurofighters, (with 119 Tornados which are going to be retired soon). the Eurofighters are of the comparison of SU30mki, without any upgrade plans too as Britain won't be able to arrange money for military so easily. while India buy 42 SU30mki+Mig29ks every year, along with upgrading SU30s to Super Sukhoi standard etc, while waiting for Rafale+LCA mk2 since 2015/16, and PAK FA at the same time as F35 will be delivered to UK... :ranger:

List of active United Kingdom military aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

with that, if we have a look on the standard of training etc then we may say that UK type country can be won by the Indian military by using the defence arms India buy in just 2-3 years period :wave:

hence I also doubt the credibility of this WFP list, this western ranking which has put UK on the number 5th. I think, UK would be placed below to Bangladesh, at least :sad:

Global Firepower Military Ranks - 2013
 
Last edited:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680

i remember above news we had till 2008/09, but I remember that Super Hornets delivered to Australia since 2010 was then considered as the most advanced version of Aircraft ever exported as it has AESA radar etc., hence replacing SU30mki on the number 2 this way......

but again we find SU30mki being upgraded to 'Super Sukhoi' standard which will also have AESA radar, with high end stealth characteristics etc, which would again make the SU30mki, the most advanced version of Combat Aircraft ever exported....:thumb:

but I saw many defence experts don't give a cent to the aircraft like Super Hornet, as compare to SU30mki or F15 delivered to Saudi Arabia or Eurofighter Typhoon itself, as, its the aircraft which is of comparison, not their upgraded functions like AESA radar etc. we also have news that Saudi Arabia is going to upgrade its F15s, and same as Eurofighter would get AESA radar etc from 2015 onward, hopefully, making its European owner in this same category too........ :ranger:
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
The 15 countries with the highest military expenditure in 2011

Figures for military spending calculated using purchasing power parity (PPP), ($ b., PPP)

1. United States- $711bn
2. China- $228bn
3. India- $112bn
4. Russia- $93.7bn
5. Saudi Arabia- $58.8bn
6. United Kingdom- $57.5bn
7. France- $50.1bn
8. Japan- $44.7bn
9. South Korea- $42.1bn
10. Germany- $40.4bn
11. Brazil- $33.8bn
12. Italy- $28.5bn
13. Turkey- $25.2bn
14. Canada- $19.9bn
15. Australia- $16.6bn

The 15 countries with the highest military expenditure in 2011 (table) — www.sipri.org


a, The figures for national military expenditure as a share of GDP are based on estimates for 2011
GDP from the IMF World Economic Outlook database, September 2011.

b, The figures for military expenditure at PPP exchange rates are estimates based on the projected implied PPP conversion rates for each country from the IMF World Economic Outlook database, September 2011.

c, The figures for Saudi Arabia include expenditure on public order and safety and might be slight overestimates.

Sources: SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, <http://www.sipri.org/databases/milex/>; and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook database, Sep. 2011, <
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2011/02/weodata/index.aspx>.
Why Has India Become the World's Top Arms Buyer?

India has replaced China as the world's largest arms buyer, accounting for 10 percent of all arms purchases during the past five years, a Swedish research group said.

India purchased some $12.7 billion in arms, 80 percent of that from Russia, during 2007-2011, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). China's arms purchases during that time were $6.3 billion, 78 percent of which came from Russia.

India has tried, but failed, to create a sizable domestic manufacturing industry for weapons or even basic military goods, while China has increased production of defense supplies. About 75 percent of India's weapons purchases came from imports during 2007-11, said Laxman Kumar Behra of the Institute of Defense Studies and Analysis, a government-funded research organization.

Some analysts in India attribute the failure to create a domestic defense industry to government involvement. "India's public sector is very inefficient and the private sector is by and large kept out of arms production," Mr. Behra said.

"We lack long-term vision," and a culture of research and development, Mr. Behra said. "The government keeps on forming one committee after the other but there is hardly any implementation" of the committee's recommendations, he said.

In a recent article in The Economic Times, Uday Bhaskar, a retired commodore and leading strategic analyst, also criticized India's weapons procurement policy.

"More than 60 years after becoming a republic and 50 years after the debacle with China, the opaque Indian defense production establishment does not produce high quality clothing and personal inventory items like boots, let alone a suitable rifle for a one million army, or tanks and aircraft."

Russia, the world's No. 2 weapons supplier in recent years after the United States, sold $7.8 billion in defense supplies in 2011, and $40.8 billion from 2005 to 2011. India bought about one-third of the supplies.

India's dependence on Russia is a holdover from the Cold War era, when the two were close allies.

South Korea was the second-largest arms importer from 2007 to 2011, with $7 billion in purchases. Pakistan and China followed, each accounting for about 5 percent of the world's total arms import during the five-year period, SIPRI said.

India's import of major weapons increased by 38 percent from the 2002-2006 period to the 2007-2011 period. India's main acquisitions over the past five years were 120 Sukhoi and 16 MiG-29 jet fighter aircraft from Russia and 20 Anglo-French Jaguar fighters.

India recently finalized a deal for 126 multi-role fighter aircraft with French defense contractor Rafael, in a deal worth $10 billion.

Why Has India Become the World's Top Arms Buyer? - NYTimes.com

 
Last edited by a moderator:

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
The 15 countries with the highest military expenditure in 2011

Figures for military spending calculated using purchasing power parity (PPP), ($ b., PPP)

1. United States- $711bn
2. China- $228bn
3. India- $112bn
4. Russia- $93.7bn
5. Saudi Arabia- $58.8bn
6. United Kingdom- $57.5bn
7. France- $50.1bn
8. Japan- $44.7bn
9. South Korea- $42.1bn
10. Germany- $40.4bn
11. Brazil- $33.8bn
12. Italy- $28.5bn
13. Turkey- $25.2bn
14. Canada- $19.9bn
15. Australia- $16.6bn

The 15 countries with the highest military expenditure in 2011 (table) — www.sipri.org


a, The figures for national military expenditure as a share of GDP are based on estimates for 2011
GDP from the IMF World Economic Outlook database, September 2011.

b, The figures for military expenditure at PPP exchange rates are estimates based on the projected implied PPP conversion rates for each country from the IMF World Economic Outlook database, September 2011.

c, The figures for Saudi Arabia include expenditure on public order and safety and might be slight overestimates.

Sources: SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, <http://www.sipri.org/databases/milex/>; and International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook database, Sep. 2011, <
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2011/02/weodata/index.aspx>.

India reins in defence spending

NEW DELHI: India hiked its defence spending by only five per cent on Thursday for the next financial year, far below previous increases with the military one of the apparent losers in the 2013/2014 budget.

Finance Minister P Chidambaram raised defence spending to 2.03 trillion Indian rupees ($37.45 billion) for the fiscal year starting April 1, up 5.2 per cent from 2012-13 when the budget stood at 1.93 trillion Indian rupees.

In 2012-13, the increase had been 17 per cent and the year before that spending was bumped up by 12 per cent to fund a modernisation programme that has turned India into the world's biggest arms importer.

Overall budget spending for next year was increased by 16 per cent, with funds focused on rural development, health and education as well as infrastructure ahead of national elections in 2014.

"I assure the house that (defence spending) constraints will not come in the way of providing any additional requirement for the security of the nation," Chidambaram told parliament.

The minister earmarked $16 billion as "capital expenditure" – meaning spending on hardware.

Domestic security experts warned India's annualised inflation rate of at least 6.0 per cent meant the million-plus military gained little from the modest increase.

"The condition of India's defence services will remain the same and the step will slow down the modernisation process of the military," said Afsir Karim, a retired general, told AFP.

India hiked its military spending by a huge 34 per cent in 2009-2010 over the previous year after the 2008 attacks in Mumbai left 166 people dead and revealed gaping holes in the country's security setup.

Mrinal Suman, who heads the military unit of Confederation of Indian Industries national trade lobby, highlighted how the defence ministry often struggled to spend the money allocated to it.

"Budgetary allocation is not really our concern because funds can be made available when needed, but the defence ministry must spend the money given to it," said Suman, one of India's top procurement specialists.

He said a string of scandals involving defence contracts – most recently involving AgustaWestland helicopters bought from Italy – had slowed arms purchases because policy-makers were reluctant to take risks on new ventures.

India's former chief V.K. Singh in a letter to Premier Manmohan Singh that was leaked to the press warned last March that the condition of the military's combat units was "alarming" because of equipment deficiencies.

India is negotiating a series of huge procurement contracts, including for 126 French Rafale fighter jets, 400 combat helicopters, as well as artillery, drones and electronic warfare systems.

India reins in defence spending | World | DAWN.COM
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
The latest calculation of Military Strength by GFP is as below, in terms of PwrIndx, to get our war purposes. it is one of the most recognized source of measuring military strength of world so we may have a look on it:ranger:

Global Firepower Military Ranks - 2013

few senior members here would be agree with me that US was having PwrIndx at around '0.11' in 2005, sometimes around it if I remember. while its now '0.2461'? so sharp change in just 6-7 years, along with twice indebted economy and having lost most of the technological superiority ::tsk:

=> along with US+EU report as below,

The Hindu : News : U.S. report says India third most powerful nation
Is globalfirepower.com a reliable source???

It shows India and Pakistan having almost same # of tanks ie 3,500 and Russia having only 2867 tanks??? I mean Russia used to have around 20,000 tanks. :confused:

Tank Strength by Country
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Is globalfirepower.com a reliable source???

It shows India and Pakistan having almost same # of tanks ie 3,500 and Russia having only 2867 tanks??? I mean Russia used to have around 20,000 tanks. :confused:

Tank Strength by Country
I dont reall believe in these ranking too, but we do have something in this regard so put these news in this thread......

not only the number and quality of arms, but also the quality of military training matters. like how UK was heavily criticized for the poor training of British soldiers who were holding Basra of Iraq, but finally they lost it, the so called city of highest Oil reserve.....

we also have a ranking of the countries based on the number of tanks they have, please check my post#27 :thumb:
 

hello_10

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,880
Likes
680
Ranking of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel

State - Active Military - Reserve Military - Paramilitary - Total

People's Republic of China - 2,285,000 - 800,000 - 1,500,000 - 4,585,000

United States of America - 1,458,219 - 1,458,500 - 11,035 - 2,927,754

India - 1,325,000 - 2,142,821 - 1,300,586 - 4,768,407 :thumb:

Russian Federation - 1,027,000 - 754,000 - 449,000 - 2,230,000

Pakistan - 617,000 - 513,000 - 304,000 - 1,434,000

Iran 523,000 1,800,000 1,510,000 3,833,000

List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lowest Defence Budget increase in over 30 years
Mar 01 2013

India will spend its lowest on defence expenditure in over three decades with several major modernisation projects set to be affected after the Union government proposed a modest hike in the annual Budget that amounts to just over 5 per cent over the last year.

As the government scrambles to cut costs given the dismal growth rate, defence spending is one of the hardest hit with the projected Budget of Rs 2.03 lakh crore coming up to barely 1.79 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product. This is a record low for India in at least three decades, with the figure dropping considerably from 3.16 per cent of the GDP in 1987.

The expenditure Budget has also revealed that the Defence Ministry suffered a Budget cut of over Rs 14,000 crore last year, a majority of which — over Rs 10,000 crore — had been marked for procurement of new defence systems.

While Finance Minister P Chidambaram promised that extra funds will be made available for the defence of the nation if the need arises, the amount allocated for purchase of new equipment is marked as Rs 86,740 crore, an 8.2 per cent hike from last year.

Modernisation of the naval fleet is set to be the hardest hit, with a cut of over 13 per cent from what was allocated last year, throwing questions on several acquisitions, including new generation conventional submarines.

The modest hike is likely to hit the acquisition of air systems hard, given the large number of aircraft purchase proposals that have been floated by all three forces and the minimal hike proposed under this subhead in the Budget. The biggest being the multi-billion dollar contract to procure 126 new fighter aircraft for which French fighter Rafale has been shortlisted.

The capital Budget for acquisition of new aircraft for the three forces is Rs 33,776 crore, a hike of just over Rs 1,000 crore from the last year. It remains to be seen whether this would cater to the first few payments that India will need to make if it signs the contract for the new generation of fighters. By conservative estimates, the first tranche of payments could come out to be over Rs 5,000 crore. The Army's much delayed hunt for 197 new light helicopters to replace the Cheetah fleet also seems to be heading for a cancellation with the allocation for aircraft for the land force being cut drastically from Rs 3,052 crore in the last financial to Rs 1527 crore in the Budget, leaving minimal scope for new acquisitions.

Despite the dismal Budget, Defence Minister A K Antony put up a brave front by saying it is the best possible, taking into account the "difficult economic situation both at home and abroad". "Factoring the current economic scenario, he (Chidambaram) has been fair to the defence sector also by increasing the Budget and assuring that should there be any urgent need in future the same would be provided," he said.

However, as the records show, not only is this year's allocation the lowest in over three decades in terms of ratio to the GDP, it is also the lowest in terms of percentage of the total annual government expenditure. This year's defence budget is 12.23 per cent of the estimated spending of the government in the upcoming financial year, considerably down from the 15.79 per cent in 1999 as well as lower from last year's 12.97 per cent.

A surprise revelation in the Budget is that the Defence Ministry's much valued funding for prototype manufacturing of defence systems under the 'Make' category of procurement has failed to make a mark. The Budget document indicates that none of the Rs 89 crore earmarked for prototype development was spent, forcing a cut in this year's allocation to a symbolic Rs 1 crore. -

Lowest Defence Budget increase in over 30 years - Indian Express
 

Godless-Kafir

DFI Buddha
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
5,842
Likes
1,837
Country flag
Lowest Defence Budget increase in over 30 years
Mar 01 2013

India will spend its lowest on defence expenditure in over three decades with several major modernisation projects set to be affected after the Union government proposed a modest hike in the annual Budget that amounts to just over 5 per cent over the last year.

As the government scrambles to cut costs given the dismal growth rate, defence spending is one of the hardest hit with the projected Budget of Rs 2.03 lakh crore coming up to barely 1.79 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product. This is a record low for India in at least three decades, with the figure dropping considerably from 3.16 per cent of the GDP in 1987.

The expenditure Budget has also revealed that the Defence Ministry suffered a Budget cut of over Rs 14,000 crore last year, a majority of which — over Rs 10,000 crore — had been marked for procurement of new defence systems.

While Finance Minister P Chidambaram promised that extra funds will be made available for the defence of the nation if the need arises, the amount allocated for purchase of new equipment is marked as Rs 86,740 crore, an 8.2 per cent hike from last year.

Modernisation of the naval fleet is set to be the hardest hit, with a cut of over 13 per cent from what was allocated last year, throwing questions on several acquisitions, including new generation conventional submarines.

The modest hike is likely to hit the acquisition of air systems hard, given the large number of aircraft purchase proposals that have been floated by all three forces and the minimal hike proposed under this subhead in the Budget. The biggest being the multi-billion dollar contract to procure 126 new fighter aircraft for which French fighter Rafale has been shortlisted.

The capital Budget for acquisition of new aircraft for the three forces is Rs 33,776 crore, a hike of just over Rs 1,000 crore from the last year. It remains to be seen whether this would cater to the first few payments that India will need to make if it signs the contract for the new generation of fighters. By conservative estimates, the first tranche of payments could come out to be over Rs 5,000 crore. The Army's much delayed hunt for 197 new light helicopters to replace the Cheetah fleet also seems to be heading for a cancellation with the allocation for aircraft for the land force being cut drastically from Rs 3,052 crore in the last financial to Rs 1527 crore in the Budget, leaving minimal scope for new acquisitions.

Despite the dismal Budget, Defence Minister A K Antony put up a brave front by saying it is the best possible, taking into account the "difficult economic situation both at home and abroad". "Factoring the current economic scenario, he (Chidambaram) has been fair to the defence sector also by increasing the Budget and assuring that should there be any urgent need in future the same would be provided," he said.

However, as the records show, not only is this year's allocation the lowest in over three decades in terms of ratio to the GDP, it is also the lowest in terms of percentage of the total annual government expenditure. This year's defence budget is 12.23 per cent of the estimated spending of the government in the upcoming financial year, considerably down from the 15.79 per cent in 1999 as well as lower from last year's 12.97 per cent.

A surprise revelation in the Budget is that the Defence Ministry's much valued funding for prototype manufacturing of defence systems under the 'Make' category of procurement has failed to make a mark. The Budget document indicates that none of the Rs 89 crore earmarked for prototype development was spent, forcing a cut in this year's allocation to a symbolic Rs 1 crore. -

Lowest Defence Budget increase in over 30 years - Indian Express
If India has 4,786 total troops how is below the US in size?? :confused:
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,951
Country flag
Ranking of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel

State - Active Military - Reserve Military - Paramilitary - Total

People's Republic of China - 2,285,000 - 800,000 - 1,500,000 - 4,585,000

United States of America - 1,458,219 - 1,458,500 - 11,035 - 2,927,754

India - 1,325,000 - 2,142,821 - 1,300,586 - 4,768,407 :thumb:

Russian Federation - 1,027,000 - 754,000 - 449,000 - 2,230,000

Pakistan - 617,000 - 513,000 - 304,000 - 1,434,000

Iran 523,000 1,800,000 1,510,000 3,833,000

List of countries by number of military and paramilitary personnel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
that is an interesting statistic................................ shows why Pakistan was forced to spread false propaganda about their soldier.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top