Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

Tridev123

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
727
Likes
2,639
Country flag
Lately I have been hearing reports that India is interested in acquiring TU-160 bombers from Russia. IMO, the TU-160 is a very capable platform.

TU-160 has the capability to fire Raduga Kh-55 series cruise missiles and AS-16 Kickback short-range nuclear missiles. AS-16 has an operational range of 300 km (160 nmi), KH-55 is said to have a maximum range of 2,500 km (1,300 nmi). So out of these two types of missiles, it is the Kh-55 series which provides the best stand off ability due to its huge range of 2000+ kms. IMO, if India is interested in buying these bombers and if the Russians are willing to sell these to us then TU-160 is a good option.
Well, we have been hearing these reports about India acquiring long range strategic bombers for a long time. Some guys even speculated that we had 4 Tu22M Backfire bombers (old reports).

It doesn't make sense to acquire it for delivering conventional bombs. Only if it is to be used as an vector for delivering nuclear bombs, then perhaps understandable.

I doubt whether the seller will also provide the long range nuclear capable missiles. The platform can be leased or bought(the maintenance factor is an big hurdle). We would require an reliable, long range(2000 km) fully nuclear capable Nirbhay cruise missile or its equivalent.

On the utility aspect, they do have an role. You cannot call it outdated or useless.
As regards their vulnerability, yes they are big in size and not very manoeuvrable. They can be shot down by enemy fighters. But they come along with other unique advantages. Like having lots of space for equipment. High payload. High speed for non stealth versions. Having powerful engines and significant electrical power capability, they can support the installation and operation of powerful jammers and other EW equipment. And probably even have the ability to fly very high(stratosphere level) like the US SR71. Now not all fighters and SAM's can operate at extreme altitudes.

And their SOP's will not advocate these bombers coming within range of SAM networks. Or even enter hostile airspace teeming with enemy fighters.

They are designed to fire/launch long to very long range missiles or other armaments and escape. Ships will be targeted with long range anti ship missiles. So they will try to avoid any encounter with enemy aircraft or missiles.

The tactics may not guarantee an 100% survival rate but at least will minimise their vulnerability.

Whether India actually acquires true long range bombers remains to be seen. Sometimes leaking such reports is also meant to signal to an adversary that ' do not pressure us too much'.

Presently India cannot build its own long range strategic bombers. May even take a couple of decades for an fully indigenous design. So, no alternative than to depend on imports if we really decide to cross the rubicon.

It is certainly not meant to be used against Pakistan. The only valid targets are China and the US(highly unlikely in the present geopolitical situation).
 

Johny_Baba

अज्ञानी
Senior Member
Joined
May 21, 2016
Messages
2,442
Likes
10,986
Country flag
Even if we don't acquire Tupolevs ala strategic bombers i believe we should-must at least procure some tactical ones...overstressing those Sukhoi airframes with all muh bomb trucks ambitions going to be bad in future. We've already lost 11 some Sukhois in peacetime due to reasons...

And jaguars lol neither they have good payload comparable to a modern tactical stirke jet nor powerful engines or for that matter range...and Honeywell F125 is just not happening...

DPSA times are more or less over in era of modern AA stuff
 

Super falcon

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
566
Likes
554
Country flag
Why India has stuck to just 36 Rafales and MMRCA deal taking time why can't I dia buy off the shelf F 35 from USA to get things look better
 

Clairvoyance

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2022
Messages
92
Likes
632
Country flag
Why India has stuck to just 36 Rafales and MMRCA deal taking time why can't I dia buy off the shelf F 35 from USA to get things look better
I guess India doesn't want to expend the money on a large number of foreign fighters or have dependence on a foreign country when there can be an indigenous alternative (albeit unproven). The IAF's squadron strength and capability is compromised in the short-term in exchange for probable long-term benefits from indigenization. Whether this bet pans out in India's favor is an open question. If the Tejas is not inducted in large numbers quickly, the short-term pains can extend into the medium-term which is very concerning.

As for the F-35, for one it hasn't yet been formally offered by the US. Additionally, even if available, I don't think India is yet comfortable with the close ties and dependence on the US such a purchase would necessarily entail. That said, if India does want a top of the line US fighter jet, the F-15EX has already been offered.

Ultimately, the Indian government seems to prioritize investing in its economy and building up a military industrial complex instead of expending its stretched out budget on even more large scale military imports. India already is the largest military importer.

Time will tell if it's the right choice, but personally I think it's a good course of action given the state of India's subcontinental neighbors. India's current military is more than enough for a limited skirmish with China and anyhow an imported airforce doesn't cut it in a large scale war given Chinese production capabilities.
 

pipebomb

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2021
Messages
524
Likes
1,092
Country flag
Well, we have been hearing these reports about India acquiring long range strategic bombers for a long time. Some guys even speculated that we had 4 Tu22M Backfire bombers (old reports).

It doesn't make sense to acquire it for delivering conventional bombs. Only if it is to be used as an vector for delivering nuclear bombs, then perhaps understandable.

I doubt whether the seller will also provide the long range nuclear capable missiles. The platform can be leased or bought(the maintenance factor is an big hurdle). We would require an reliable, long range(2000 km) fully nuclear capable Nirbhay cruise missile or its equivalent.

On the utility aspect, they do have an role. You cannot call it outdated or useless.
As regards their vulnerability, yes they are big in size and not very manoeuvrable. They can be shot down by enemy fighters. But they come along with other unique advantages. Like having lots of space for equipment. High payload. High speed for non stealth versions. Having powerful engines and significant electrical power capability, they can support the installation and operation of powerful jammers and other EW equipment. And probably even have the ability to fly very high(stratosphere level) like the US SR71. Now not all fighters and SAM's can operate at extreme altitudes.

And their SOP's will not advocate these bombers coming within range of SAM networks. Or even enter hostile airspace teeming with enemy fighters.

They are designed to fire/launch long to very long range missiles or other armaments and escape. Ships will be targeted with long range anti ship missiles. So they will try to avoid any encounter with enemy aircraft or missiles.

The tactics may not guarantee an 100% survival rate but at least will minimise their vulnerability.

Whether India actually acquires true long range bombers remains to be seen. Sometimes leaking such reports is also meant to signal to an adversary that ' do not pressure us too much'.

Presently India cannot build its own long range strategic bombers. May even take a couple of decades for an fully indigenous design. So, no alternative than to depend on imports if we really decide to cross the rubicon.

It is certainly not meant to be used against Pakistan. The only valid targets are China and the US(highly unlikely in the present geopolitical situation).
You know many in Australia advocate for getting b-21 from the uncle. IF we decide to get tu-160 then amreeki can't simply waive the caatsa danda at us they also need to dangle the b-21 carrot (which was not possible in case of s-400 )
 

pipebomb

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2021
Messages
524
Likes
1,092
Country flag
You know many in Australia advocate for getting b-21 from the uncle. IF we decide to get tu-160 then amreeki can't simply waive the caatsa danda at us they also need to dangle the b-21 carrot (which was not possible in case of s-400 )
B-52, b-1 airframs are at the end of their life anyway. Tu-160 prospective depends totally on what russia is willing to offer and at what price. Ofcourse there are far more urgent deals which gets precedence over tu160
 

Love Charger

चक्रवर्ती
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2021
Messages
8,744
Likes
23,044
Arre sir, kya ullu banate ho!? Mine plough kidhar hain?! Uske bina trials nahi successful ho sakte. Phir se karo, agle saal.
Mine plow melt hogaye ji, wo indian faulad se bana tha but tank bach gaya khali kyuki wo german faulad se bana tha .
Aur german cheeze mazboot hoti hai
 

MirageBlue

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2020
Messages
312
Likes
1,949
Country flag
B-52, b-1 airframs are at the end of their life anyway. Tu-160 prospective depends totally on what russia is willing to offer and at what price. Ofcourse there are far more urgent deals which gets precedence over tu160
Estimated cost of a brand new build Tu-160M was $275 million each. That's without any of the infrastructure that would need to be set up to support the type's operations.
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top