OSINT from Satellite images
- Thread starter sayareakd
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2017
- Messages
- 16,330
- Likes
- 70,185
Don't we have only 11 C17 in total?
11th C-17 will join in Aug 2019. So as of now 10 only.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/12/final-c-17-heavy-jet-joins-indian-air-force-in-q3-2019.html
Only doubt remains if we operate 11 or 12 C-130s, since no news of the crashed C-130 being replaced.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,416
- Likes
- 56,946
I want an image where I see strategic bombers of IAF parked.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,882
i think we don't have bomber aircrafts...
- Joined
- May 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,538
- Likes
- 5,049
Do we even need strategic bombers ?
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,882
yes...if u wanna take out strategic bases in one go...use bombers for cluster bombing...or we gonna use 5-8 fighter jets...
- Joined
- May 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,538
- Likes
- 5,049
For that, you need either complete aerial superiority over enemy airspace, complete destruction of their AD network or incredible standoff capability, both in quality and quantity. Also, bombers are to be used for long range offensive missions and power projection. IAF needs to be a destructive force first by inducting required squadrons, tech and weapons for defending the airspace from both China and Pak. After that, we can focus on power projection.
sthf
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2016
- Messages
- 2,271
- Likes
- 5,329
A big no. India doesn't need nor can it afford to buy and maintain strategic bombers. CAPEX already sucks ass.
We fight border wars and any current or future military needs beyond our borders will not involve fighting a distant war against an established military power.
India however will need a good fleet of fighter bombers for A2/AD naval operations in the near to mid future.
IndianHawk
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2016
- Messages
- 9,058
- Likes
- 37,675
Do India need bombers is a case to be debated .but if we need them we can certainly afford them . They are great value for money and serve 40-50 years easily . Our issue is shitty procurement policy not as much as lack of capex.
We might need them as they provide a very long arm and can force enemy to focus on different theatre. And we have to project power all over Indian Ocean at the very least.
Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,416
- Likes
- 56,946
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,882
no...we dont...its such a big baby... Difficult to hide from public eyes
- Joined
- May 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,538
- Likes
- 5,049
Deja Vu
.........................................
- Joined
- May 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,538
- Likes
- 5,049
Possible as it can be used for anti shipping role. We have A&N islands to protect. We had Foxbats and it was a secret.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,416
- Likes
- 56,946
We officially had it in past only.
Dispute is with current rumours. But yeah Andaman, it's our massive stationary aircraft carrier.
It needs to be depopulated and militarized to achieve absolute superiority in Eastern naval front.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,882
back then ordinary citizens had zero knowledge about defense equipment...no one had digital camera...even if anyone saw mig25 flying...they would would think.its just another military jet...they can't differentiate which aircraft is what....nowadays take a pic...and reverse search it on google....u will get karta karma kriya ...i.e a to z
..
IMO YES...........
Just imagine that if we had such a capability, would we have needed the costly modification of Su? In its current form MKI could carry just one BRAHMOS. But imagine a dedicated bomber with a payload of around 20 to 30tons. We would have been able to pack 4 to 6 BRAHMOS. MKI is an Air Superiority fighter and with a BRAHMOS in its belly, it looses its primary functionality.
In past we had modified and used transporter as bomber. So this theory of not being a expeditionary force or fighting war just across border is not strong enough. Cost is a factor though, but if we could afford, we should have the capability. It acts as a force multiplier.
We approached for that last in 2016, but all ended in political talks. Nothing much from forces side. Instead of TU-22M3M, IN showed more interest in P8.
- Joined
- May 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,538
- Likes
- 5,049
We don't need bombers for Pak. For China, yes but we are still geared towards Pak and we're not going to invade China anytime soon. IA and IAF are for defence and counter offence because of our foreign policies and International politics. IN is gradually becoming a tool for power projection because of Chinese threat and support from other powers. So, bombers for maritime anti shipping role ? Yes.
For Ground operations ? Our armed forces are not ready because our policy makers are not ready.
We needed surveillance capability before offensive, IMO it was the right choice.
We don't need to shower Brahmos on Pak like America, France and Britain did in Syria. We can use platforms like Nirbhay for that. Brahmos is for sniping important targets, not for saturation attacks. So imagine a mission for taking out an C&C HQ deep within Pak. 4 Modified MKI's under the cover of 6-8 air superiority MKI's is enough for that mission. Also, for Air launched weapons, you need speed and altitude. So for Brahmos, we need a bomber that can go supersonic.
Before we induct bombers, we need make IAF superior in terms of quality and quantity and we need to develop standoff weapons with range of 1000-1200 KM. With 400 KM range Brahmos, IAF need to go inside Pak airspace if it wants to hit deep. So bombers can't go until IAF clears out AD systems and gain complete control of their airspace, which is not an easy task.
So the best solution, IMO is to increase the range of Brahmos and induct various other standoff weapons so that we don't have to cross IB. Bombers are bulky and costly to maintain. If we can modify small no. of Tejas and MKI's for launching cruise missiles, we can save a fortune.
First of all why you are binding the role of a bomber with invasion? By that logic the biggest White Elephant with India is its AC. Right?
TU-22M3M is a reconnaissance and strike bomber and GOI had approached Russia for that role only. It was more for maritime surveillance and strike rather then conventional.
With TU-22 we would have got the flexibility to use it in conventional bomber role too which unfortunately P8 doesn't offer.
By this logic, we should not have developed any ALCM. But when we have developed ALCM, then its better to have a potent launching platform rather then a Jugaad.
Now in a typical attack formation, a mix of ground attack and escort vehicles are included. Latest example being Balakot. In case of a BRAHMOS equipped MKI, if we need to snipe say three or four different targets, we would have to include that much plane in the formation.
In worst case scenario, if there happens any interception, those 3 or 4 MKIs would be of no good in the formation. So for 4 MKI we would have to increase the numbers of escort. Lets say 2 escort per MKI, which would make it a 12 plane formation. With a dedicated bomber, the same could be achieved by half the number.
Discussing this further in this thread seems not appropriate. Lets take it to some other thread.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
DFIlite twitter OSINT post | OSINT | 22 | |
|
OSINT Images Contribution | Members Corner | 74 | |
|
|
DFI OSINT Images Contribution. | OSINT | 8 | |
| H | OSINT compilation thread | Knowledge Repository | 54 |
