India-China Border conflict

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

No.

seems like one was kia or very srsly injured, btw new video has come out, most likely of the same clash of which a video had come out in 2020 showing 1 pla soldier injured and captured by IA at pangong

 

[mist_consecutive]

seems like one was kia or very srsly injured, btw new video has come out, most likely of the same clash of which a video had come out in 2020 showing 1 pla soldier injured and captured by IA at pangong

There were pretty deadly (but no KIA) clashes at Pangong Tso north bank in early-mid May 2020. Shiv Aroor mentions one such clash was the precursor to what was going to happen at Galwan. Chinese for the first time acted with such aggression unheard since the 1962 war.

 

[Gyyan]

Bc they are preparing for more than 100 airframes by the end of the year in addition to 200+ j20s and here we are with our falling squadron strength and subpar fighter jets.

 

[skunk works]

Will never have a off-roading gypsy driving gf.
Sedlyf.

offroad like this:

like I said, its not a wonder vehicle, but good enough for most uses.

 

[mist_consecutive]

And few people say we dominate their air force

We do, in Tibet, not in SCS or over Beijing. Prove me wrong instead of swallowing Chinese shlong.

 

[Gyyan]

We do, in Tibet, not in SCS or over Beijing. Prove me wrong instead of swallowing Chinese shlong.

For how long though?
And with our shitty procurement speed and plans the credibility our domination over them will be gone in just a year away if they want.

 

[mist_consecutive]

For how long though?

Not long, unfortunately, but hopefully till we start churning out LCA Mk2. With GoI self-goal by delaying MRCA deal and illiterate fanboys calling it a aatmanirbhar masterstroke, a delay in the LCA Mk2 project means those fanboys will be stroking Chinese shlongs very soon.

 

[jai jaganath]

We do, in Tibet, not in SCS or over Beijing. Prove me wrong instead of swallowing Chinese shlong.

They can deploy many refuelers to counter their high altitude runways
They have huge nos to throw and moreover in every category of missions they want
They have more nos of auxiliary aircrafts to support their air missions
Theg can maintain air dominance in their region and also challenge us in our side
On other hand our sq strength is falling expecting for indigenous fighter jets to come after 1.5 decades and then addressing it is nothing but foolishness bcoz enemy is not gonna wait
These guys couldn't even complete mmrca which adds sufficient fuel to our issue

 

[Gyyan]

Not long, unfortunately, but hopefully till we start churning out LCA Mk2. With GoI self-goal by delaying MRCA deal and illiterate fanboys calling it a aatmanirbhar masterstroke, a delay in the LCA Mk2 project means those fanboys will be stroking Chinese shlongs very soon.

That's 2028 in the earliest.
Even if we did churn out what difference will mere 12/16 aircraft/year make against 40+/year j20
30+(±5)/year j11&j16&j10
And possibly j31.

 

[srevster]

We can never match their nos the gap is widening and no attempt can stop it
Only option is to make situation better but even that depends upon iaf and GoI

Stop your whining

 

[EarthCitizen]

 

[jai jaganath]

Isn't f-6 declared as buffer

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

Isn't f-6 declared as buffer

Wasn't in 2020 may

 

[mist_consecutive]

They can deploy many refuelers to counter their high altitude runways
They have huge nos to throw and moreover in every category of missions they want
They have more nos of auxiliary aircrafts to support their air missions
Theg can maintain air dominance in their region and also challenge us in our side
On other hand our sq strength is falling expecting for indigenous fighter jets to come after 1.5 decades and then addressing it is nothing but foolishness bcoz enemy is not gonna wait
These guys couldn't even complete mmrca which adds sufficient fuel to our issue

I do not blame you, any rookie will see despair over the Chinese growing military worth, and you will be right.

Except, mountains are guerilla warfare territory for air combat. A tropical rainforest is to troops what mountains are for the air force. Now, why is that?

• Mountains are ideal hiding/radar-evading terrain. Long-range radars become useless and open up territory for ambushes and hit-run tactics.
• BVRs and missile range become a non-factor. The majority of warfare will be close-combat dogfights.
• MANPADs atop mountains open up a plethora of possibilities and tactics.

Now, to your question.

• How many refuellers do they have? How many can they allocate towards Tibet leaving other vulnerable areas (SCS, Taiwan) ?
• Huge nos. of aircraft but not enough airbases to launch them, not enough HAS, and weak, stretched supply lines.
• Auxiliary aircraft, true, few AWACS more. Nothing spectacular or game-changing like the NATO fleet.
• Neither of us can effectively maintain air dominance in the long-run. And for the record, till now they have been overwhelmed by IAF.

The Foolishness of GoI to rely completely on HAL/ADA for its near & long-term future of air power is a different topic, and I am completely in resonance with you on this fact. We are debating present here.

That's 2028 in the earliest.
Even if we did churn out what difference will mere 12/16 aircraft/year make against 40+/year j20
30+(±5)/year j11&j16&j10
And possibly j31.

We can churn out 24+ per year or more if required. We always act proactively. 24+ per year is a very reasonable target with 2 production lines. War-time productivity of any country is ~3x of peacetime, and for rising economies like India & China, it can reach 4x.

We can never match their nos the gap is widening and no attempt can stop it
Only option is to make situation better but even that depends upon iaf and GoI

We don't have to match the gap. We just need to defend the LAC.

 

[mist_consecutive]

After this, our army beat the shit out of these pansy-ass soldiers and recked their vehicles.




Now, how do I know if this is not the other way around (that we got our asses handed over later?). Look at the shadows. The Chinese photo, the shadow is almost vertical, or slightly leaned towards right (towards west, since this is north bank of Pangong Tso), which means this is either late-morning or noon.

Now, look at the shadow in the video I posted above. The shadow is clearly on the left, with the sun on their backs. This means the video is sometimes in the afternoon or early-evening.

 

[Jimih]

Chinese PLA are still sucking up to past clashes by releasing unverified pics/videos every month.

Lots of events happened after that and it was bloody afterall for PLA ladyboys.

 

[vidhwanshak]

After this, our army beat the shit out of these pansy-ass soldiers and recked their vehicles.




Now, how do I know if this is not the other way around (that we got our asses handed over later?). Look at the shadows. The Chinese photo, the shadow is almost vertical, or slightly leaned towards right (towards west, since this is north bank of Pangong Tso), which means this is either late-morning or noon.

Now, look at the shadow in the video I posted above. The shadow is clearly on the left, with the sun on their backs. This means the video is sometimes in the afternoon or early-evening.

Before:

After:

 

[jai jaganath]

I do not blame you, any rookie will see despair over the Chinese growing military worth, and you will be right.

Except, mountains are guerilla warfare territory for air combat. A tropical rainforest is to troops what mountains are for the air force. Now, why is that?

• Mountains are ideal hiding/radar-evading terrain. Long-range radars become useless and open up territory for ambushes and hit-run tactics.
• BVRs and missile range become a non-factor. The majority of warfare will be close-combat dogfights.
• MANPADs atop mountains open up a plethora of possibilities and tactics.

Now, to your question.

• How many refuellers do they have? How many can they allocate towards Tibet leaving other vulnerable areas (SCS, Taiwan) ?
• Huge nos. of aircraft but not enough airbases to launch them, not enough HAS, and weak, stretched supply lines.
• Auxiliary aircraft, true, few AWACS more. Nothing spectacular or game-changing like the NATO fleet.
• Neither of us can effectively maintain air dominance in the long-run. And for the record, till now they have been overwhelmed by IAF.

The Foolishness of GoI to rely completely on HAL/ADA for its near & long-term future of air power is a different topic, and I am completely in resonance with you on this fact. We are debating present here.



We can churn out 24+ per year or more if required. We always act proactively. 24+ per year is a very reasonable target with 2 production lines. War-time productivity of any country is ~3x of peacetime, and for rising economies like India & China, it can reach 4x.



We don't have to match the gap. We just need to defend the LAC.

They have their own platform in awacs refuelers or lifters
They can built it in huge nos if they want as they have mic
Even during war they can replace their lost aircrafts but we can't
The advantages of mountain aerial warfare is applicable to them too
Problem is nos they have nos and over it manufacturing capacity
On other have don't have both
Another major point no one is gonna help us by creating pressure in scs so they can deploy assets if they want

 

[mist_consecutive]

They have their own platform in awacs refuelers or lifters
They can built it in huge nos if they want as they have mic
Even during war they can replace their lost aircrafts but we can't
The advantages of mountain aerial warfare is applicable to them too
Problem is nos they have nos and over it manufacturing capacity
On other have don't have both
Another major point no one is gonna help us by creating pressure in scs so they can deploy assets if they want

Hold your horses. MIC is no longer stamped steel and riveted aluminum. It is milled & carefully CNC'ed titanium block and carbon-fiber & reinforced fiberglass. What it means is, it will take time.

They can build it in huge numbers, sure, we can as well with a bit of external help. Also, we don't have to reply to fighter jets with fighter jets. We can reply with indigenous MANPADs and SAMs as well.

We can replace our lost aircraft as well. IAF is trained on multiple types of jets, which means we can loan/buy Mirage-2000s, Mig-29s, Rafale, etc. from the current inventory of friendly countries as well without going begging like Ukraine.

But all these debates of attrition and manufacturing capability come at a prolonged (3+ month) of intense war, which China will avoid at any cost, seeing the condition of Russia. Nothing will make NATO happier to kill two birds (two growing economies) with one stone, and they will happily provide us with any capability we ask for tacking China.

 

[Jimih]

Nothing will make NATO happier to kill two birds (two growing economies) with one stone.

That is the Idea actually.