Strategic Command to acquire 40 nuclear capable fighters

[Kunal Biswas]

We can get 40 Su-34 or, 20 Tu-160...Although Tu-160 sounds mouthwatering but maintaining Su-34 will be easier.

Exactly..

TU-160 is a big airframe, high maintenance costs also engines are different..
Also we don't require such a heavy bomber..

SU-34 meets our specification also as mentioned before no extra logistic issue..

 

[plugwater]

Having a new different plane is a disadvantage. Enemy will know about the mission once the bomber enters their airspace it will lead them to concentrate on only that bomber to shoot it down. So my option would be Su-30 or MRCA winner.

 

[sayareakd]

yeah manc i was thinking about the same thing, We have trident already in place, but to attack with fighter means that we can at the last minute call off our fighter aircraft, as the same is not the case with missile once the missile is airborn, that means missile and warhead cannot come back to inventory, either it can be reach its target destination or if aborted it will be made to self destruct.

Plus the attack from Fighters means we are really thinking of taking enemy target out as we have put our ace pilots on line for doing the same.

 

[Patriot]

SFC should look into SU-35 BM as an option..... It's a mean machine & multirole too..

Sukhoi/KnAAPO Su-35BM/Su-35-1/Su-35S Flanker




Sukhoi/KnAAPO Su-35BM/Su-35-1/Su-35S Flanker

 

[Singh]

EDITED

it appears that SFC which is the most elite force of the arm forces, want to the self sufficient, if orders so come from the Political Council which is advice by Executive Council of the NCA.

SFC wants its own bombers, nuke subs and its own missile force, so that they will not depend on the forces who will be too busy in there war.

If SFC is aiming for self-sufficiency and goes for Bombers, Nuke subs, missiles, radars and also special forces then it will lead to a diminshed role for other three branches, and greater bureaucracy and duplication. This will also require significant doctrinal change. Does it make sense to go for a separate SFC altogether ?

 

[A.V.]

Ok guys just to update there is absolute no talk about any Tu or SU-34 in the pipeline for entire this year here in russia neither is any offers on su35BM which has been rejected in favour of new version of MKI all this is speculation as of now till a final talks are scheduled

 

[Yusuf]

What this proposal also means is that india is slowly increasing its arsenal as well. 40 strategic bombers means atleast 40 more to keep 1 each for each bomber. It can be even more.

 

[nrj]

they sure will be su30MKIs. it should be over and above the 40 that the IAF has been recently hinting at. IAF i am sure will mention their own requirements and not that of SFC, also to be noted, there the number is 42 not 40 so it seems that order of 42 could be scaled upto 82 now.

avi the other day was hinting at 360 su30s, and with this order we are already talking about 310, 50 more to go!

Makes quite sense!

MKI is the legendary muscle. The reliability over MKI platform is far greater than any other now. Not to forget upcoming Brahmos & Nirbhay on MKI will make it damn loaded aircraft.

 

[Daredevil]

Why the need of nuclear capable fighters when we have missiles?. I don't see the point of using them especially against China whose aid-defense will be more formidable and difficult for Indian fighters for deep penetration strikes. Unless we don't have confidence in our missiles I don't see the point of these nuclear capable fighters.

 

[nrj]

Why the need of nuclear capable fighters when we have missiles?. I don't see the point of using them especially against China whose aid-defense will be more formidable and difficult for Indian fighters for deep penetration strikes. Unless we don't have confidence in our missiles I don't see the point of these nuclear capable fighters.

One way of seeing is India looking to secure Nuclear Triad & keeping the same assets healthy,upgraded.

 

[A.V.]

This provides a very interesting thing in mind is india considering joint patrols or resourse bases outside india might be a very big deterrent if stationed outside the mainland and it will be under a new command so just a point of view IAF is more than capable to defend the mainland

 

[Yusuf]

DD we want to keep an effective second strike arsenal. We have to have all of it. Bombers, missiles, subs etc... Even the US and USSR did that continue to do so.

 

[EagleOne]

still doubt some thing actually what we are looking at ? fighter or bomber.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Makes quite sense!

MKI is the legendary muscle. The reliability over MKI platform is far greater than any other now. Not to forget upcoming Brahmos & Nirbhay on MKI will make it damn loaded aircraft.

MKI is a good platform for Nuke strike, But structurally it is inferior to SU-34 while carrying big payloads..

MKI = 6500KG ( 24900 - 18400 )
SU-34 = 8000KG

This may be a good time to have such air-crafts..
Though its upto Gov..

 

[Daredevil]

The most effective second strike nuclear arsenal will be sub-launched ballistic or cruise missiles. To me, if we consider a nuclear triad, air based nuclear capable fighter is most vulnerable and interceptable than land based and sea based nuclear capable launching platforms.

People here are talking about fighters with range of 3500 km but that is only one way. If a fighter has to reach Beijing and come back it should have a range of 7000km. And during its travel it will be taken down by one or the other SAM battery or even intercepting enemy fighters.

These fighters make more sense if we are considering deep penetration strikes in Pakistan. Against China, they are not at all effective and waste of resources.

 

[Pintu]

I think we should also have Long Range Bombers, armed with air launched cruise missile, and also SLBM or SLCMs to have a sound second strike capability.

Regards

 

[nrj]

MKI is a good platform for Nuke strike, But structurally it is inferior to SU-34 while carrying big payloads..

MKI = 6500KG ( 24900 - 18400 )
SU-34 = 8000KG

This may be a good time to have such air-crafts..
Though its upto Gov..

Indeed SU34 is the dedicated platform for greater load carrying capacity but I think such purchase will involve many other related requirements be infra, training, logistics. Although SU34 is always better than maintaining Tupolov candidates. Personally I would like to see SU34 in IAF colors!

I think actual info on same won't surface in public domain. The SFC, CCS, GOI will have their decisions & they will be incorporated without revealing detail information of same. People outside that small circle will keep guessing.

 

[JBH22]

ONCE for all Russia will not offer the Tu-160 kindly get that.one thing can be done let's modify the Tu-142 to something like Tu-95MS but do we have the expertise or will Russians bolster India's Nuclear projection agreed they leased the Akula to us but still...

 

[sandeepdg]

Su-34 can do the tasks of both Tu-22 and Su-24,has more if not same range wonder why they never considered this plane agreed it has similar features to the Su-30mki but its better suited for long range missions

Tu-22 has almost thrice the weapons load of an SU-34 but then again we need to induct modern aircrafts and I also think that the SU-34 should be in our armory, since its the successor to the TU-22.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

India's Nuclear Weapons Take to the Skies | TakePart - Inspiration to Action

India's Nuclear Weapons Take to the Skies

With most of the Armageddon-fearing planet apparently losing its taste for nuclear weapons, India's upped its investment in the end of civilization with the planned purchase of 40 nuclear-capable fighter jets.

The official administrator of India's nuclear arsenal, Strategic Forces Command (SFC), has requested two squadrons of modern aerial assets, with room on the wings for the world's most dangerous weapon.

The response to the news was positive from hawks in India's parliament and from cockroaches worldwide looking to rule the planet after man's wholesale destruction.

India's conventional air force is currently tasked with delivering atomic goods to whosoever has it coming; but if the purchase order goes through, SFC will finally get its own dedicated fighting force.

For those handicapping at home, the most likely candidates to unleash an atomic holocaust are rivals India and Pakistan, who share a border, a legacy of war, and a tendency to test nuclear weapons.

Neither country is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), so both are free to expand their nuclear programs beyond the burden of international law. Curbing both nations' nuclear ambitions tops most non-proliferationists' to-do list.

India entered the nuclear club with an atomic test on May 18, 1974.

Dubbed "Smiling Buddha," the eight kiloton blast was touted as a "peaceful nuclear explosion," despite the fact that it shepherded years of weapons proliferation.

Pakistan responded with its own nuclear test in 1998, brought about in large part by reigning atomic miscreant Abdul Qadeer Khan.

Khan gained his nuclear know-how while working the centrifuge shift at a Netherlands research site. He brought his boosted intel home to Pakistan, then sold nuclear secrets to North Korea, Libya and Iran.

If India rings up the register for the 40 new fighters, it will add to a growing miscellany of nuclear technology on the subcontinent.

With a submarine in the works for 2012, India is gunning for the nuclear triad of air, land, and underwater atomic delivery systems. It is fast becoming the world's biggest buyer in weapons and delivery systems.

The second-most populous nation on Earth is expected to spend $80 billion over the next five years for arms contracts from the United States—which, incidentally, also sells weapons to neighboring Pakistan.