India China LAC & International Border Discussions

[tsunami]

Using ballistic missile for attacking our deeper airbases like tejpur,shilong,siliguri may acclerate nuclear war...chinese know it but they wants to confuse and bully us...what we have to do is making our nuclear posture very clear to the chinese....chinese have a tendency to solve every military problem by ballistic missile,which is very risky...they are master at bully warfare

This is why I asked question about MBRLs initially. They are cheap, can be manufactured in 1000s of number. May not be accurate or maneuverable but can be used in huge numbers and can overpower air defense with number(Just a thought, I don't have details so don't ask). Now Direct distance from tejpur to LOC is less then 160 km. If china manages to bring any 200km+ range MBRL near enough to LOC it can constantly keep targeting tejpur... no??

 

[tsunami]

Tibetan Plateau



Chengdu Air Base 30°42′19″N 103°57′1″E
Baoshan Airport 25°3′12″N 99°10′6″E
Qamdo Bamda Airport 30°33′13″N 97°6′31″E
Caojiabao Airport 36°31′41″N 102°2′22″E
Chongqing Baishiyi Air Base 29°29′43″N 106°21′31″E
Dali Air Base 25°39′0″N 100°19′9″E
Dangxiong Air Base 30°29′6″N 91°3′57″E
Dazu Air Base 29°38′10″N 105°46′19″E
Dehong Mangshi Airport 24°24′6″N 98°31′57″E
Diqing Airport 27°47′38″N 99°40′38″E
Golmud Air Base 36°24′2″N 94°47′10″E
Jing Hong/Gasa Airfield 21°58′22″N 100°45′47″E
Lhasa Gonggar Airport 29°17′50″N 90°54′47″E
Lijiang Airport / Yunlong Air Base 26°40′48″N 100°14′46″E
Lincang Airfield 23°44′17″N 100°1′30″E
Luliang Air Base 24°59′18″N 103°38′30″E
Mengzi Air Base 23°23′43″N 103°20′4″E
Nyingchi Kang Ko Int 29°18′12″N 94°20′7″E
Qionglai Air Base 30°29′24″N 103°27′53″E
Shigatse Air Base 29°21′7″N 89°18′41″E
Simao North Airfield 22°47′38″N 100°57′33″E
Wenshan Air Base 23°42′56″N 103°49′37″E
Xiangyun Midu Air Base 25°26′43″N 100°44′6″E
Xining Air Base (New) 26°32′27″N 101°48′0″E
Yuanmou Air Base 25°44′15″N 101°52′55″E
Zhanyi Airport

These are the number of military Airports in Tibet. Wikipedia






India Have less than 25 At Chinese border , don't know the exact list , it's just a random number .


DF15&16 Has ranges of 1000 Km , CJ20 Airlaunched Cruise Missile 2000Km , CJ 10 1000Km , . That 220 is very huge indeed , may be they included the S400, BMD and other Air defences then it Might be acceptable .

You Know DRDO SAAW it is such a small munition can disable Airfields then imagine a Ballistic Missile with 500Kg warhead can do .

If our Airbase is somehave disabled that's enough for them to Destroy the Fighters in ground . Remember in 1965 we lost many fighters most of them are destroyed in ground .

Just believing in our capabilities is not a solution , War is full of surprises

I prepared this today morning....

Airbases below 400 km distances are highlighted in red, above 600 km highlighted in green.

PS don't judge my life, bored in Lockdown.

 

[Karthi]

When making this calculation runway width is much more important than length. The wingspan of Su50mki is 15m, so if a run way lets say is 40m wide but the missile hits close to the edge is still usable.

The blast radius more than 40 metres , if it misses still can do the job. Secondary explosion with Remaining fuel may cause more damage .

 

[Karthi]

I prepared this today morning....

View attachment 47189

Airbases below 400 km distances are highlighted in red, above 600 km highlighted in green.

PS don't judge my life, bored in Lockdown.

Good work bro

 

[Karthi]

This is why I asked question about MBRLs initially. They are cheap, can be manufactured in 1000s of number. May not be accurate or maneuverable but can be used in huge numbers and can overpower air defense with number(Just a thought, I don't have details so don't ask). Now Direct distance from tejpur to LOC is less then 160 km. If china manages to bring any 200km+ range MBRL near enough to LOC it can constantly keep targeting tejpur... no??

MBRLs are highly inaccurate , I forget the WS2 , WS3 MBRLs of China , it has 200Kms but inaccurate even in the upgraded version.
If China uses the MBRLs the destruction is not guaranteed .

 

[tsunami]

I prepared this today morning....

View attachment 47189

Airbases below 400 km distances are highlighted in red, above 600 km highlighted in green.

PS don't judge my life, bored in Lockdown.

For all airbases across Myanmar I have calculated distance to the nearest India China border point in Arunachal considering that to be main target as Main job for Chinese fighters will be to support ground forces and attack supply lines in Arunachal.

Can anyone provide any chart of altitude vs engine power to understand more about roll of elevation in this scenario.

@Karthi you only provided list of airbases near Arunachal, what about UK and Kashmir?

 

[Karthi]

For all airbases across Myanmar I have calculated distance to the nearest India China border point in Arunachal considering that to be main target as Main job for Chinese fighters will be to support ground forces and attack supply lines in Arunachal.

Can anyone provide any chart of altitude vs engine power to understand more about roll of elevation in this scenario.

@Karthi you only provided list of airbases near Arunachal, what about UK and Kashmir?

It will take time to find all the Airfields

 

[Craigs]

The blast radius more than 40 metres , if it misses still can do the job. Secondary explosion with Remaining fuel may cause more damage .

Blast radius is only useful if there is anything nearby at that instant otherwise it is just fireworks. In this case we are talking about an ALG with no fixed physical structures (even the ATC will be mobile or a temp structure). What you want to check is the blast crater and how big will it be? Based on online pictures I would say it depends on the warhead on the missile - a high explosive warhead will have a huge fireball but small crater. A ground penetrator warhead will have a bigger crater, an airburst warhead will have no crater. So what is the size of the crater - for ICBMs it could be several 100m in diameter for SRBMs and MRBMs it will be less than that - let us assume a 50m crater, if missile hits the edge of the runway then only 25m of runway will be damaged still leaving a usable 15m.

Also, in case you missed it - most ballistic missiles have airburst warheads to maximize destruction of structures underneath (also known as maximize the 'blast radius'). However for forward air bases we usually won't have much fixed structures other than a flat ALG. So the question is how many missiles in China's inventory do they have with ground penetrator warheads (specialized for attacking runways).

 

[tsunami]

MBRLs are highly inaccurate , I forget the WS2 , WS3 MBRLs of China , it has 200Kms but inaccurate even in the upgraded version.
If China uses the MBRLs the destruction is not guaranteed .

Our guided Pinaka rockets have some 50 meters CEP. Not compared to 10mtr CEP of missile but still good enough.

 

[Bajirao]

Effectiveness of rockets against hardened shelters of fighter jets will be very low ..secondly rockets are no so much cheap as many thinks ,our guided pinaka will cost 40-50 lakh per rocket,smercs costs us 1 crore per rocket ,pinaka mk3 will cost in similar range

 

[Karthi]

Blast radius is only useful if there is anything nearby at that instant otherwise it is just fireworks. In this case we are talking about an ALG with no fixed physical structures (even the ATC will be mobile or a temp structure). What you want to check is the blast crater and how big will it be? Based on online pictures I would say it depends on the warhead on the missile - a high explosive warhead will have a huge fireball but small crater. A ground penetrator warhead will have a bigger crater, an airburst warhead will have no crater. So what is the size of the crater - for ICBMs it could be several 100m in diameter for SRBMs and MRBMs it will be less than that - let us assume a 50m crater, if missile hits the edge of the runway then only 25m of runway will be damaged still leaving a usable 15m.

Also, in case you missed it - most ballistic missiles have airburst warheads to maximize destruction of structures underneath (also known as maximize the 'blast radius'). However for forward air bases we usually won't have much fixed structures other than a flat ALG. So the question is how many missiles in China's inventory do they have with ground penetrator warheads (specialized for attacking runways).

Earth P penetrating Warhead only burrows a few meters into the ground before it explodes. Indeed, the earth slows the warhead so quickly on impact that it cannot penetrate very deeply. Rather, by exploding just a few meters underground instead of at or above the surface, a much larger fraction of the energy of the explosion is transmitted to the ground. The explosion creates a strong seismic shock wave that propagates and can damage even Underground bunker's. penetration of a few meters increases the underground destructive effects by more than a factor of twenty

DF15 C variant is a bunker buster variant have a deep penetrating warhead . It has 700Km range , CEP 10-20 , it is intended to destroy even nuclear hardened structures

 

[Craigs]

Earth P penetrating Warhead only burrows a few meters into the ground before it explodes. Indeed, the earth slows the warhead so quickly on impact that it cannot penetrate very deeply. Rather, by exploding just a few meters underground instead of at or above the surface, a much larger fraction of the energy of the explosion is transmitted to the ground. The explosion creates a strong seismic shock wave that propagates and can damage even Underground bunker's. penetration of a few meters increases the underground destructive effects by more than a factor of twenty

DF15 C variant is a bunker buster variant have a deep penetrating warhead . It has 700Km range , CEP 10-20 , it is intended to destroy even nuclear hardened structures

The key point to takeaway is that only the ground penetrating missiles are useful against runways. So how many of those do the Chinese have? All of a sudden we are not looking that bad. Also, with the Chinese every figure is goal seeked - if a missile to be effective is required to have a small CEP then it will be announced as such with no clarifications given.

DF-15A,B,C all have different CEPs how is that possible? Either they are different variants of the same missile with different warheads or they are entirely different missiles. So I don't believe their 10m CEP claim.

If they are different missiles with different guidance systems then I am willing to bet that with such variation in guidance systems in just one missile type there is no way they can maintain any uniformity of training or simulators ergo it will just not be effectively wielded.

 

[Bajirao]

Army and air force mrsam will have capability for defending against chinese srbm and as for cruise missile our akash can handle that.....govt. in 2017-18 sanctioned hardened shelter building project for 30 big airbases...these sheltes will be in such a scattered way that to target middle section of these shelters will require 4-5 srbm per shelter...

 

[Bajirao]

Army and air force mrsam will have capability for defending against chinese srbm and as for cruise missile our akash can handle that.....govt. in 2017-18 sanctioned hardened shelter building project for 30 big airbases...these sheltes will be in such a scattered way that to target middle section of these shelters will require 4-5 srbm per shelter...

Sorry for a wrong info....govt. santioned the shelter project in 2018-19..
And this for 110 shelter in chinese border for su-30...in western sector iaf already have this...

 

[sthf]

View attachment 47166

3-4 Missile is enough to completely disable an airfield.


View attachment 47167

It will take 8 Hours to reconstruct the Airfield if everything goes as planned . It will take 4 days if the Airfield Take 36 missiles , just 24 hours is enough to destroy our grounded Fighters.


We are not porks I m expecting sensible answers from you guys . May be that 220 figure is for completely destructing without a single chance to repair or may be they are added Air Defences into the equation

It is downright disingenuous of you to not post the source while simultaneously cherry picking from it.

Scorecard 1: Chinese Capability to Attack Air Bases from The U.S.-China Military Scorecard: Forces, Geography, and the Evolving Balance of Power, 1996–2017 on JSTOR

Scorecard 1:, The U.S.-China Military Scorecard, pp. 45-70

www.jstor.org

This paper (your source) specifically catered to two American airbases, Kadena in Okinawa and Anderson in Guam. The conditions mentioned here i.e. a surprise attack on just two bases doesn't apply to India. Not only it will take a good time for Chinese to mobilize their forces against India, there is no way in hell they can do that in secret. We are forward deployed, they are not. IA units massively outnumber their Chini counterparts.

In the event of hostilities, air forces around the world remove their forward deployed assets place them well inside the country. Standard stuff post Operation Focus and India's own experience of Operation Chengiz Khan. Your assumption is faulty to say the least.

So allow me to poke some holes in your argument.

India has anywhere between 60-90 airports and airbases for distances less than mentioned here. More if you make the distance same i.e. ~700 kilometers. This limitation of US simply doesn't apply to India.

All of China's SRBM equipped brigades are based within range of Taiwan NOT INDIA.

Of those, roughly half are too inaccurate to be used for precision targeting.

So I tried to look up the BLU-67 equivalent in Chinese service (atop a ballistic missile) and came up empty handed. So far this is mostly assumptions on the author's part. Plus,the DF-21F is not an SRBM but an MRBM and in my opinion not to be used against Indian targets for the lack of numbers.

=============================================================

So here you cropped out pieces of info to suit your point of view while conveniently missing the larger picture that this was the worst case scenario. To present a relatively holistic picture do consider the following.

Increasing the number of runways from 2 to 3 or an additional runway located near by coupled with active defences cuts down the closure time from 4-10 days to anywhere between 02-1.5 days.

Now you do this to 20+ airbases in India and your maths gets tanked.

===============================================================

There was a lot more to be unpacked since I went down the rabbit hole of citations and sources mentioned but this should be enough for now. And next time include your source so it can be properly disseminated.

 

[scatterStorm]

What is the equation when SAMs and CIWS are brought into the picture? You think our airfields are left undefended?

These days we also have interesting jugaads like AK630 on a truck (may look hideous but will work).

Instead of a theoretical assessment of Kadena, lets try to assess what happened at the Syrian air bases.

Good question raised? However ballistic missiles terminal stage velocities can exceed value > M5 so CIWS cannot defend against such fast moving target. Now considering the hypersonic glide missiles which they showcased in there parade recently, with CIWS I'd say 0% chance, because you are adding a new variable, "maneuvering".

Equation: (Terminal Velocity + Maneuvering)

With such KE, you can punch a hole few meters deep, you can temporarily shut down operations. However they won't just attack the airfield, it would also be communication assets such as radars, and hangers.

SAM is a different deal, a quick reaction SAM maybe can hit, but chances of those are slim as well. The only possibility or I should say PK of 1 to have is to either use lasers, or kill the payload by intervening its ballistic missile trajectory and not allowing the payload to enter its terminal phase.

 

[scatterStorm]

Also, how did they come with a figure of 0.84 with a CEP of 40m and 1 missile? I have to see the equation they used and the calculation. I don't think it is valid. My back of the envelope calculation gives a vastly less chance.

Possibly firing a Ballistic missile with larger payload, instead of having small fragmentation warhead, you can change your payload according to conditions, in such case they can use ground penetration warheads much like in a GBU 57. I have no data about DF17 however it can carry nuclear payload too.

 

[scatterStorm]

I prepared this today morning....

View attachment 47189

Airbases below 400 km distances are highlighted in red, above 600 km highlighted in green.

PS don't judge my life, bored in Lockdown.

Didn't Drdo just recently presented guided pinaka, range can be extended close to 100Km? Brahmos can take the rest of them within 600Km.

 

[Karthi]

It is downright disingenuous of you to not post the source while simultaneously cherry picking from it.

Scorecard 1: Chinese Capability to Attack Air Bases from The U.S.-China Military Scorecard: Forces, Geography, and the Evolving Balance of Power, 1996–2017 on JSTOR

Scorecard 1:, The U.S.-China Military Scorecard, pp. 45-70

www.jstor.org

This paper (your source) specifically catered to two American airbases, Kadena in Okinawa and Anderson in Guam. The conditions mentioned here i.e. a surprise attack on just two bases doesn't apply to India. Not only it will take a good time for Chinese to mobilize their forces against India, there is no way in hell they can do that in secret. We are forward deployed, they are not. IA units massively outnumber their Chini counterparts.

In the event of hostilities, air forces around the world remove their forward deployed assets place them well inside the country. Standard stuff post Operation Focus and India's own experience of Operation Chengiz Khan. Your assumption is faulty to say the least.

So allow me to poke some holes in your argument.

View attachment 47278

View attachment 47279

India has anywhere between 60-90 airports and airbases for distances less than mentioned here. More if you make the distance same i.e. ~700 kilometers. This limitation of US simply doesn't apply to India.


View attachment 47280

All of China's SRBM equipped brigades are based within range of Taiwan NOT INDIA.

View attachment 47281


Of those, roughly half are too inaccurate to be used for precision targeting.



View attachment 47282



So I tried to look up the BLU-67 equivalent in Chinese service (atop a ballistic missile) and came up empty handed. So far this is mostly assumptions on the author's part. Plus,the DF-21F is not an SRBM but an MRBM and in my opinion not to be used against Indian targets for the lack of numbers.

=============================================================

So here you cropped out pieces of info to suit your point of view while conveniently missing the larger picture that this was the worst case scenario. To present a relatively holistic picture do consider the following.

View attachment 47283


Increasing the number of runways from 2 to 3 or an additional runway located near by coupled with active defences cuts down the closure time from 4-10 days to anywhere between 02-1.5 days.

Now you do this to 20+ airbases in India and your maths gets tanked.

View attachment 47284

View attachment 47285


===============================================================

There was a lot more to be unpacked since I went down the rabbit hole of citations and sources mentioned but this should be enough for now. And next time include your source so it can be properly disseminated.

The same level of a porki thinking India won China lost . Are you happy now , it's my personal choice to Provide The source or not , I will give it if anyone ask . And yes Chinese are shits we can easily defeat them with one ALG operating at Arunachal Pradesh currently . And Few Su 30 MKIs are enough to counter J20 because J20 is shit Chinese toy . There missiles won't fit into Their high speed rails so it is almost impossible to move those Weapons to forward stations . They don't have any PW bombs so we can stay chill because we know it take 220 Missiles to completely destroy Airfield and the Himalayan ranges favours us with nice climate and show it's worst face against Chinese , because God is with us . There factories will shut forever they can't produce any Weapons whenever start a war with India .


And most importantly their superior infrastructure at Tibet won't help them because you know , Chinese roads are poor quality . there is more blessings for us but I m keeping it minimum . I m sure That the article that is posted by one member is safe with us cos Chinese don't know English , we know the reality of India's strength and China's weaknesses but China don't know it .

mod edit: flamebait removed

 

[Karthi]

Good question raised? However ballistic missiles terminal stage velocities can exceed value > M5 so CIWS cannot defend against such fast moving target. Now considering the hypersonic glide missiles which they showcased in there parade recently, with CIWS I'd say 0% chance, because you are adding a new variable, "maneuvering".

Equation: (Terminal Velocity + Maneuvering)

With such KE, you can punch a hole few meters deep, you can temporarily shut down operations. However they won't just attack the airfield, it would also be communication assets such as radars, and hangers.

SAM is a different deal, a quick reaction SAM maybe can hit, but chances of those are slim as well. The only possibility or I should say PK of 1 to have is to either use lasers, or kill the payload by intervening its ballistic missile trajectory and not allowing the payload to enter its terminal phase.

Expert's believes CIWS is the only thing We can use against Hypersonic Weapons now (may be For Glide vehicles). Hear in an interview with one US military expert