Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[IndianHawk]

bomb the shit out of any IOR island? Su30MKI not enough for you? Bombers are a strategic waste.

China and Russia both have su30 ! Why do you think they maintain large bomber fleets??

 

[IndianHawk]

There are two island groups we have, Andamans & Maldives. Both are easily within the combat range of Su-30MKIs. I don't reckon we will be taking over any other distant island groups in any near future.



There is no current use case for long-range bombers in our scenario. The use-case of long-range bombers is delivering massive ordinance over long ranges.
However, their use case was outdated in the cold war era itself. Bombers are clumsy, high RCS, slow-flying planes, and ideal target practice for enemy SAMs and interceptors.
They are the only viable option if you have complete air superiority over your enemy.

Our immediate enemies, Pakistan & China, both have sophisticated, medium & long range SAMs and good 4th generation fighters to take on these bombers. We need multi-role fighters which can protect itself in hostile environment, and complete the mission.

You are severely underestimating use case of a strategic bomber and versatility it provides. Anyway a difference of opinion is welcome.

 

[mist_consecutive]

You are severely underestimating use case of a strategic bomber and versatility it provides. Anyway a difference of opinion is welcome.

You are welcome to provide the use-cases and highlight the versatility points, so we can have a fruitful discussion

 

[IndianHawk]

Why don't folks read the tea leaves.

The talk of bombers isn't started by internet fanboys but by the former chief of world's fourth largest airforce !!

Also the rumor mill suggest the support is coming of PMO directly just like nuke submarines.

The way I see it it's another strategic ability being added . A strategic long range bomber combined with air launched nuclear missiles. Those are coming .

Other people may disagree with my theory I'm not interested in any debate today.

 

[IndianHawk]

You are welcome to provide the use-cases and highlight the versatility points, so we can have a fruitful discussion

Perhaps some other day too late for me today. Cheers.

 

[IndianHawk]

from the blog of bharat karnad. He seemed quite certain. Even talks about numbers.

It is always heartening when something one has ardently advocated over the years begins to take shape, becomes reality. [For the case made for a genuine strategic bomber, and this aircraft in particular, see pages 335-336 in my 2015 book –‘ Why India is Not a Great Power (Yet)’.] The negotiations with Russia are apparently in the final stages for securing on lease six – a third of a squadron — better than nothing! of the supersonic, fly-by-wire, 4-man crewed Tu-160. It will leave the frontline Russian fleet with 29 of these aircraft, because only a total of 35 ‘White Swans’ have been built. Published material suggests the White Swan Tu-160 (the equivalent of the American B-1 strategic bomber) has a 70metres/second climb rate, max speed of 2,200 km/h and cruising speed of 960km/h, unrefueled range of 12,300km, and combat radius of 7,300km.

 

[radion]

There are two island groups we have, Andamans & Maldives. Both are easily within the combat range of Su-30MKIs. I don't reckon we will be taking over any other distant island groups in any near future.



There is no current use case for long-range bombers in our scenario. The use-case of long-range bombers is delivering massive ordinance over long ranges.
However, their use case was outdated in the cold war era itself. Bombers are clumsy, high RCS, slow-flying planes, and ideal target practice for enemy SAMs and interceptors.
They are the only viable option if you have complete air superiority over your enemy.

Our immediate enemies, Pakistan & China, both have sophisticated, medium & long range SAMs and good 4th generation fighters to take on these bombers. We need multi-role fighters which can protect itself in hostile environment, and complete the mission.

No body is going to fly a bomber in contested airspace with operational sams and fighter that are yet to be taken out.

 

[SUPERPOWER]

Ideally we have good chances of getting Tu-22M backfire compared to Tu 160 due to significantly higher inventory level. I don't think Russia will sell/lease TU 160

Then we should we should ask america for b1b.

 

[no smoking]

China and Russia both have su30 ! Why do you think they maintain large bomber fleets??

Well, both have the world No.1 navy targeting them from drive way. So, they all need a large bomber fleet to launch massive number of anti-ship missiles in a single wave. Americans claim that they can intercept 12 missiles in the same time, then attacker need shoot 24 missiles in one wave. With Su30, you will need 24 planes to do the job, but even with Chinese old H-6, you only need 4. Besides, these bombers' long range also provide more mission flexibility.
In the case of India, none of her top enemies can organise such a navy power in Indian Ocean in 20 years.

 

[Love Charger]

We definitely need a bomber
Its shame we retired those topulev 142 naval anti ship planes.
Given the way Chinese are coming up in the Indian ocean and also to raise our status among the quad countries , we need a bomber fleet of around 20 aircrafts.
Nothing very fancy, just convert some old transporter in to bomber.
Basically for mass bombings , launching anti ship missiles and also using near the LAC against the various new Chinese bases

 

[tomthounaojam]

Before we buy this huge white elephant, at least try to reach the required sanctioned strength of IAF.

 

[NutCracker]

China and Russia both have su30 ! Why do you think they maintain large bomber fleets??

Lmao.. atleast check what "strategic bombers" ChingChong have.

H-6.. It can barely carry 8 ton.
JH-7 .. Can carry 10 ton.
Su-30MKI missile truck... Can carry 8 ton .

THis is just some scumbag Import lobby activated through bribing..

 

[NutCracker]

Well, both have the world No.1 navy targeting them from drive way. So, they all need a large bomber fleet to launch massive number of anti-ship missiles in a single wave. Americans claim that they can intercept 12 missiles in the same time, then attacker need shoot 24 missiles in one wave. With Su30, you will need 24 planes to do the job, but even with Chinese old H-6, you only need 4. Besides, these bombers' long range also provide more mission flexibility.
In the case of India, none of her top enemies can organise such a navy power in Indian Ocean in 20 years.

And Chinese bombers are not even impressive , its pathetic to even call them "strategic bomber"

H-6.. It can barely carry 8 ton.
JH-7 .. Can carry 10 ton
Su-30MKI missile truck... Can carry 8 ton ....

 

[Javelin_Sam]

Lot of people now talking about this.

View attachment 166908

View attachment 166909

This is how lobbies go about it when they want to get in. First use your contacts to speak of the need for a strategic bomber for the Air Force component of SFC. Then conveniently say "Hey look we have the platform". Tu-160 BlackJack. Then this Bharat Karnad guys writes talks are in advanced stage. After 1 year this guy will write that their is delay. After 2 year again article will be out regarding acquisition stalled for strategic bomber. How IAF will be blown out to stone age without these platforms. Then the contacts of these lobbies inside services will start - give us Multirole Bomber Aircraft (MRBA). Just like the 70,000 tonne Nuke powered AC with EMALS and 114 MRFA and Athos. What advantage does 6 Tu-160s give the IAF. Sorry to say, it is not crossing LAC. It is nothing short of a suicide mission. Stand deep inside Indian airspace, outside the ranges of PLA's long range enemy SAMs and what ? Launch some 6 cruise missiles each. Where is this CM? Will it also be imported? If the plan is to launch hypersonic glide vehicles, then the indigenous hypersonic glide vehicles are not coming anywhere for active deployment anywhere before 2035. Priorities!! IAF is at 70% of it's required strength and 1/3 rd of that is filled with outdated aircrafts that needs to be replaced in next 10 years. Su-30 is not the tip of the spear anymore. And here we are

 

[binayak95]

China and Russia both have su30 ! Why do you think they maintain large bomber fleets??

Russia and China both consider the US to be their primary enemy - an enemy that is one entire ocean away, is protected by multiple layers of island bases in the pacific, and many nations' air forces on the other.

They need bombers that have enhanced range and payload to carry a few dozen cruise missiles close enough to launch at the US - to threaten US assets.

We dwell cheek by jowl with China and Pakistan - any and all stand off weapons brings there principal assets well within our striking reach.

Our aim should be ground their air force and not suffer the same fate. Your bombers wont get time to take off before the runways and hangars are cratered.

Use your standoff missiles Nirbhay and Prthvi (with clustered munitions) to destroy their air fields.

Let swarms of unmanned wingman drones take care of their IADS - open up their defenses, then see what Jaguars and Sukhois and Tejas can do to ground units.

 

[binayak95]

We definitely need a bomber
Its shame we retired those topulev 142 naval anti ship planes.
Given the way Chinese are coming up in the Indian ocean and also to raise our status among the quad countries , we need a bomber fleet of around 20 aircrafts.
Nothing very fancy, just convert some old transporter in to bomber.
Basically for mass bombings , launching anti ship missiles and also using near the LAC against the various new Chinese bases

Your P8Is can carry far greater and more potent payload for greater range than the Tu142 could hope to.
WWII hai kya?

 

[binayak95]

from the blog of bharat karnad. He seemed quite certain. Even talks about numbers.

It is always heartening when something one has ardently advocated over the years begins to take shape, becomes reality. [For the case made for a genuine strategic bomber, and this aircraft in particular, see pages 335-336 in my 2015 book –‘ Why India is Not a Great Power (Yet)’.] The negotiations with Russia are apparently in the final stages for securing on lease six – a third of a squadron — better than nothing! of the supersonic, fly-by-wire, 4-man crewed Tu-160. It will leave the frontline Russian fleet with 29 of these aircraft, because only a total of 35 ‘White Swans’ have been built. Published material suggests the White Swan Tu-160 (the equivalent of the American B-1 strategic bomber) has a 70metres/second climb rate, max speed of 2,200 km/h and cruising speed of 960km/h, unrefueled range of 12,300km, and combat radius of 7,300km.

yeah this idiot Karnad speaks from his ass. He's the other Field Marshall Eric von Sweinstein

 

[binayak95]

Well, both have the world No.1 navy targeting them from drive way. So, they all need a large bomber fleet to launch massive number of anti-ship missiles in a single wave. Americans claim that they can intercept 12 missiles in the same time, then attacker need shoot 24 missiles in one wave. With Su30, you will need 24 planes to do the job, but even with Chinese old H-6, you only need 4. Besides, these bombers' long range also provide more mission flexibility.
In the case of India, none of her top enemies can organise such a navy power in Indian Ocean in 20 years.

US CBG can sustain a saturation strike of 60 Harpoon class missiles. Easily.

and with more and more burkes being equipped with DEWs, expect that number to increase exponentially.

 

[Wisemarko]

This is how lobbies go about it when they want to get in. First use your contacts to speak of the need for a strategic bomber for the Air Force component of SFC. Then conveniently say "Hey look we have the platform". Tu-160 BlackJack. Then this Bharat Karnad guys writes talks are in advanced stage. After 1 year this guy will write that their is delay. After 2 year again article will be out regarding acquisition stalled for strategic bomber. How IAF will be blown out to stone age without these platforms. Then the contacts of these lobbies inside services will start - give us Multirole Bomber Aircraft (MRBA). Just like the 70,000 tonne Nuke powered AC with EMALS and 114 MRFA and Athos. What advantage does 6 Tu-160s give the IAF. Sorry to say, it is not crossing LAC. It is nothing short of a suicide mission. Stand deep inside Indian airspace, outside the ranges of PLA's long range enemy SAMs and what ? Launch some 6 cruise missiles each. Where is this CM? Will it also be imported? If the plan is to launch hypersonic glide vehicles, then the indigenous hypersonic glide vehicles are not coming anywhere for active deployment anywhere before 2035. Priorities!! IAF is at 70% of it's required strength and 1/3 rd of that is filled with outdated aircrafts that needs to be replaced in next 10 years. Su-30 is not the tip of the spear anymore. And here we are

Appears that pipeline for Russian arms to India (and others) is running dry. Push would be for quick sales to generate cash any way possible.

 

[NutCracker]

This is how lobbies go about it when they want to get in. First use your contacts to speak of the need for a strategic bomber for the Air Force component of SFC. Then conveniently say "Hey look we have the platform". Tu-160 BlackJack. Then this Bharat Karnad guys writes talks are in advanced stage. After 1 year this guy will write that their is delay. After 2 year again article will be out regarding acquisition stalled for strategic bomber. How IAF will be blown out to stone age without these platforms. Then the contacts of these lobbies inside services will start - give us Multirole Bomber Aircraft (MRBA). Just like the 70,000 tonne Nuke powered AC with EMALS and 114 MRFA and Athos. What advantage does 6 Tu-160s give the IAF. Sorry to say, it is not crossing LAC. It is nothing short of a suicide mission. Stand deep inside Indian airspace, outside the ranges of PLA's long range enemy SAMs and what ? Launch some 6 cruise missiles each. Where is this CM? Will it also be imported? If the plan is to launch hypersonic glide vehicles, then the indigenous hypersonic glide vehicles are not coming anywhere for active deployment anywhere before 2035. Priorities!! IAF is at 70% of it's required strength and 1/3 rd of that is filled with outdated aircrafts that needs to be replaced in next 10 years. Su-30 is not the tip of the spear anymore. And here we are

These top brass retirees who make such comments out of the blue, should be brought under the radar of ED .
We have to decapitate import lobbyists who make waves for stupid proposals. Its pathetic.

Look at the clickbait title of such video .
6 Tu-160 White Swans for Indian Air Force | Negotiations with Russia in the final stages - YouTube