Seriously is that u writing this bro
What can we built exactly in manpads we still haven't inducted it
Then u think we will be able to match their mic with 'little' help from external countries on contrary we don't even have a cent of mic or industrial capability wrt China
Coming to what we manufacture even that's nased on imported sub systems even hypothetically include those do u think we will match their might industry
Again to critical components manufacturing wrt China yes they can do it in small duration they can lunch above their weight as even we will do in times of war but their intensity will damn too high
Again to most interesting point which nation will provide us lost fighters which nation especially against mighty China and most importantly without begging
We have seen during clash the mismanagement sir
All we can expect our DM running to countries not to stop spares atleast and getting few ammunitions from them in c-17
Sorry if I have written something offending
@jai jaganath I will give you one good reply. Take it or leave it, I am not babysitting you anymore.
Let's start from the basics. Air combat requires the following things to be present -
- Fighter jets for conducting missions
- Support (transport, recon, EW, refuellers, AWACS) aircraft.
- Suitable airbases to launch the above aircraft.
- Supply lines to keep all of the above working.
Now, let's look at the ground-picture (not what will be X years from now).
Fighter jets for conducting missions
The main strength of China is surplus 4th-gen jets (J-10s, J-11s, and J-16s, plus a handful of Su-30 & Su-35), amounting to some ~800-1000 jets (
propaganda number alert!)
Similarly, we counter them with our own 4+gen jets (Su-30MKI, Mig-29UPG, Rafale & Mirage-2000), amounting to some ~430 jets.
Now, the fun thing is, China doesn't have enough airbases to deploy even half of their total 4th gen fighter strength, whereas we can deploy 100% of them towards China. I will explain this in more details later.
Winner:- India by a slight margin.
Note:- Why am I counting J-20 out of it? J-20 (and similarly any stealth fighter) requires specialized facilities and climate-controlled hangers to be kept air-worthy. None of the airbases in Tibet currently has that capability. They will be likely to be operational in very limited numbers, only to conduct specialised missions.
Support (transport, recon, EW, refuellers, AWACS) aircraft.
Chinese air transport is mainly IL-76MD & Y-20s, which is ~50-55 aircrafts (
propaganda number alert!), which will be barely adequate to supply their entire eastern front + mainland china during an intense war.
Similarly, we too have a decent airlift capacity consisting of ~34 no. of IL-76MD & C-17s which will be barely adequate in supplying northern & eastern fronts. The catch here is, our supply routes are shorter, so we won't be entirely relying on military transports.
So what about refuellers (which will be critical in supporting ops in Tibet) ? Well, they have only a handful. Their mainstay is H-6 bombers modified to carry refuelling pods, and can transfer ~18T of fuel. For comparison, J-11 can carry 9T of fuel. So a H-6 bomber can only refuel ~2-3 J-11 fighter. That is just a bit better than buddy-to-buddy refuelling.
For comparison, IL-78MKI we operate can carry 105T of fuel, which can effectively refuel ~18 a/cs in one flight.
What about AWACS ? Well, we do have a disadvantage, with China sporting ~30 (
propaganda number alert!), and we have only 6. But Chinese AWACS are based on propeller a/cs which have a lower speed and service ceiling, and it also remains to be seen how many can they allocate to Tibetian sector.
Winner:- Contested with a slight advantage to China in local sectors.
Suitable airbases to launch the above aircraft.
This is where it all falls apart for China
All the above falls apart spectacularly due to the lack of suitable airbases to launch & sustain air missions.
Now, why is this so critical? Didn't China offset the disadvantage by just building longer runaways? Well, no.
Disadvantages of super-high altitude airbases -
- A rarefied atmosphere leads to erratic lift characteristics. High temperatures (20+ deg.) in mid-day lowers the density of already thin air, which effectively stops safe air operations.
- Rarefied atmosphere leads to longer take-off lengths, and longer take-off lengths lead to higher tire speeds and overheating of tires, increasing tire bursts, brake-pad fires, and other accidents.
- High-altitude winds (generally in afternoon-night) over Tibet often mean no a/cs can be safely operated during that time.
- High-chance of aircrew developing altitude sickness unless acclimatized, which means a/cs cannot do touch-and-go missions from mainland China.
Even if we leave high-altitude airbases, we have
3 times more suitably-placed airbases for operation than China. All airbases in Punjab, Haryana, J&K, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, & NE are within a suitable distance of air missions over Tibet/LAC.
China just cannot sustain a large-scale air operation from Tibet against India.
Winner:- Overwhelmingly, India.
Supply lines to keep all of the above working.
Perhaps the most neglected. All our airbases (except Leh & Thoise in Ladakh) are connected by stable, fail-proof supply lines. Even if all our transport aircraft get shot down, we can use our road & excellent rail network to keep our bases supplied.
China doesn't enjoy this privilege. Not only their supply lines are extremely stretched, but go through vulnerable choke points (bridges, tunnels, narrow mountain passes). Not only this, sustaining a military over Tibet will cost a huge amount of money in supplies alone.
Winner:- India.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stop crying, we are not doomed. If our condition was that dire, China would have attacked us in 2020 and captured Ladakh & Arunachal Pradesh. Instead, they are building fortifications and digging trenches on their own lands.
www.bilibili.com
