Ladakh Flash Point

[Maxef208]

If the Bharatis believe they have won a stunning victory, its all to the the best. What is gained by disillusioning and disabusing them? Let them think they are lord of all they wish they could survey and let the PLA get on with running the territory.

The problem is they develop an inflated sense of ego and aggression and will start causing even more trouble thinking their enemy is "weak" because they didn't outright destroy them. This is why it's good to have real material to check Indian ego, though as we can see, some of them do disbelieve their own eyes and sometimes even try to twist things so they still come out a winner. It is still better than nothing though. You can't lose if you don't think you can lose. India's greatest weapon is the spin machine in it's media.

 

[coolieno99]

Wow, this channel is created exactly 4 months ago and posts China is doomed videos daily. I wonder why.

I also have question about the enigmatic Indian.

Indians do not look like Tibetans, and don't speak the Tibetan language. And there's no Indians living in Tibet. Zero. Aksai Chin is on the Tibetan plateau. Why the Indians want a piece of Tibet so badly?

Maybe someone here wiser than me might know the answer.

 

[localizer]

I also have question about the enigmatic Indian.

Indians do not look like Tibetans, and don't speak the Tibetan language. And there's no Indians living in Tibet. Zero. Aksai Chin is on the Tibetan plateau. Why the Indians want a piece of Tibet so badly?

Maybe someone here wiser than me might know the answer.

They keep saying China gonna cut off their rivers.

Also, Indians want to free Tibetans, Uyghurs, HKers, TWese

 

[coolieno99]

Full 2hr ceremony for Rafale.

View attachment 63468

The induction of 5 jet planes is big news.
Every month over 4,000 Indian children died from malnourishment is not even news.

 

[jimmyjames30x30]

I know that I've often tried to defend my position that US isn't the instigating force behind India's actions at Aksai Chin and moreover, India's actions are a result of its own ultra nationalism.

However, there do exist a possibility that the current Ladakh confrontation will slow down China's pivot to Naval and Airforce modernization. The US may very well cheer and support India and could be the instigating force (Jayshanker seem to be a US lover). More funds will now flow to Army and Rocket Forces. Hopefully, China has economic growth to back this up but still the tax collection is certainly going to be impacted now and in the future due to covid pain.

I disagree. Actually, I believe it's the total opposite. Had the conflict happened the Korea Peninsula, it would really be a set back. But Ladakh is different. Ladakh is effectively on the plateau where supply is really limited compare to large land warfare on any great plain area. The kind of warfare that will happen in Ladakh, would be high tech warfare with special forces. Which is exactly what the PLAN, PLAAF is expanding on. Ladakh will especially give the PLAAF a perfect testing ground to prove some of its new systems. This is exactly why the Indian and the Western propaganda system has being working hard to try to dissuade China from escalating.

Besides, modern military are really highly integrated with each other. An increase in funding in the Rocket Forces does NOT in anyway weakens the Navy, because they work together, especially in China's case.

If they really want to drag China into a land war in order to divert its resources from navy and Air force, they will create a perfectly vulnerably situation in which China will bite on and dive all the way deep into India. What China will normally do, is to limit the battle ground to the only plateau (Kashmir).

The only possible case in which China will be forced to involve Herself, is if India and Pakistan start a land war, and Pakistan fall under disadvantage, while at the same time, India reveals her own internal instability. This will draw China in, and eventually force China to assume the role of Peace-keeping a large chunk of India along side Russia and the US. This will really drain China, because it will basically turn India into a mega size post-Saddam Iraq. Because of the proximity, neither a strong and aggressive India, nor a weak and divided India is truly in China's interest.

China can handle India on the plateau (Kashimir) perfectly fine with the resources and forces NanJing and Xinjiang military district now have. India have not shown any intention nor ability to start a total way with Pakistan and China.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Is this a joke?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Temstar]

Is this a joke?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

No this is real, I heard this news from multiple sources a few days ago too.

If you look at all the hand to hand fighting in the last 6 month, particularly the two big ones you see they've always been at night. India have just realised, just as the Americans did in Korea that PLA is master of night combat.

 

[localizer]

Also the indians want to free Manchuria.

No this is real, I heard this news from multiple sources a few days ago too.

If you look at all the hand to hand fighting in the last 6 month, particularly the two big ones you see they've always been at night. India have just realised, just as the Americans did in Korea that PLA is master of night combat.

Lol the typical comment on these articles. It's the same over at DFI.

 

[SinoSoldier]

The nature of the regional geography and higher priority strategic directions means the PLA will never deploy the majority of its combat aviation force to the western strategic direction during peacetime, but that they retain the potential to surge aircraft and munitions into the theater during times of tension or conflict.

Is this not a time of tension? And insofar as the surge goes, there has been increased deployment of J-11s and a few JH-7 and H-6H (apparently not H-6K as previously thought). Granted, there are some strike elements in the mix, but within the overall deployment picture, it has mostly been air-to-air assets that were mobilized. Whether the PLAAF will play a supportive or an organic interdiction role remains to be seen (and hopefully never seen).

In so far as the aircraft capable of strike are concerned, I'm slightly confused as to your weighting of respective IAF and PLAAF A2G strike capabilities.
While the IAF's Rafales are able to carry Storm Shadows, and they are a capable powered stand off strike capability (though of course rather limited in quantity), the rest of the IAF lacks powered stand off strike munitions at all (unless you count the handful of Su-30MKIs with Brahmos integration, and sure, for the purposes of discussion why not include them).

OTOH, the PLA has some, what 100+ H-6Ks each carrying six KD-20 ALCMs with stand off range that we can even conservatively put at over 1500km, and then there are all of the PLA's JH-7As, J-16s and J-10B/Cs are all KD-88 compatible as well? This isn't to say that it wouldn't be nice if all of the PLA's tactical fighters were compatible with a 500km+ range stand off missile as well, but the 200km range offered by KD-88 and the sheer variety of platforms it is integrated on makes it a very flexible weapon as well.

And of course this is ignoring ground based launch systems (whether it be GLCM or perhaps more messily, SRBMs/IRBMs, so for the purposes of discussion perhaps ignore these for now).

Our discussion isn't an IAF vs PLAAF comparison but rather that of the deployed assets relevant to this conflict, so it's not worth bringing up the 100+ H-6Ks in the PLAAF inventory or even its other strike platforms. I don't think we need a discussion to understand that the IAF, as a whole, does not match the PLAAF in either technology or quantity. AFAIK the PLAAF forward-deployed H-6H and JH-7 aircraft are each in single-digit quantities. The 200-km-range KD-88s do not have TERCOM or DSMAC capabilities that allow it remain low during cruise so as to avoid IAF radar. Neither do the KD-63/B ALCMs that the H-6Hs carry.

And I was mistaken in believing that the H-6 variant deployed at Kashgar was the CJ-10-capable "K" version; they were in fact the much older "H" iteration that is only compatible with the 200-km-range KD-63B.

So in this respect the Rafales and their complementary Storm Shadows do give the IAF a strike advantage against the PLAAF hardware in the region. And while the PLAAF is certainly capable of reaching targets within India, that alone doesn't preclude the IAF from hitting critical PLAAF/PLAGF infrastructure deep within China. This alone might sway the perspective which PLA brass holds of India's forces.

Even in terms of AEW&C, the PLA could afford to deploy just a quarter of its total fleet of KJ-2000s+KJ-200s+KJ-500s and it would outmatch the entire IAF's current AEW&C fleet, and we are not even considering the use of other force multipliers here like ELINT/SIGINT or stand off jamming platforms.

In terms of tactical combat air, I don't think anyone would dismiss the capability of AESA equipped Rafales with Meteors, but again it's a matter of scale.
Having 36 AESA equipped fighter jets or order with a modern high end BVRAAM in service is neat in TYOOL 2020, but the PLA has 300ish AESA equipped J-16s and J-10Cs that are PL-15 compatible (leaving aside J-20s for sporting reasons). And all of this doesn't consider the role that J-11Bs and J-10As would play of course, which field the PL-12 which are less capable than PL-15 or Meteor, but still very much in the "superior-to-R-77-category" that forms the bulk of the IAF's BVRAAM inventory, and of course the effectiveness of which is multiplied further by the depth and scale of your AEW&C fleet.

Again, this isn't a discussion about the IAF vs PLAAF as a whole. I agree that 5 Rafales (even 36 for that matter) do not put a dent in the technology and numerical advantage that the PLAAF enjoys over its Indian counterpart, but within the realm of the Ladakh standoff things are less lopsided. A good analogy would be the Argentinian air force vs the RAF during the Falklands war.

One could argue that the PLAAF could merely deploy more forces in the region should the need arise, but so far we haven't seen a significant shift of their higher-end units to southern airbases (correct me if I'm wrong). No massive buildup of J-16/J-10B/C/H-6K have occurred in regions close to Hotan AB or Kashgar AB. Additionally, if conflict does break out at a moment's notice, PLAAF aircraft deployed elsewhere might not make it in time to have as major of an influence as they would've had they been deployed to Hotan/Kashgar in the first place.

So if your argument is that the IAF has the potential to carry out some sort of surprise first strike, I'm not in disagreement with that, in so much as that carrying out cross border surprise first strikes is not exactly difficult in this day and age.

But in so far as the force on force balance of A2A, A2G, and airborne force multipliers go -- unless your hypothetical first strike is able to render the bulk of the WTC's air fields inoperable for a significant period of time (and frankly they'd probably have to hit CTC as well) -- the resultant PLA combat air surge in terms of the quality of capabilities they bring to the table but also the quantity of capabilities they can field, would be capable of a significant riposte outstripping the scope of what the IAF's own rather limited strike capabilities are able to offer.

I think you make a valid point regarding any counterattacks the PLAAF might mount (reminds me of IAF's response to PAF during the 65 war), but that prospect has to be weighed against the amount of interest each nation has in sustaining such a conflict as well as the acceptable damage that each military is willing to bear.

An IAF surprise strike, or even a "riposte" in response to a PLA/AF operation, could put a major dent in the PLA's ability to conduct operations as effectively as some SDF/PDF members believe they could.[/QUOTE]

 

[SinoSoldier]

Well it seems that you are arguing for The Storm shadow ALCM (aka SCALP EG in French service). Yes it is a formidable 500km ranged ALCM. But don't China already have the CJ series functioning as ALCMs when carried by the H-6Ks? They do have at least a 1000km range advantage over the Storm Shadow. So they can be launched by the less stealthy H-6 bombers well beyond the ranges of any Indian radar, air defences, and fighters.

You must not forget what the Storm Shadow actually is. Its France's own version of a Tomahawk. And since France has no history of launching super long ranges LACM from any naval or land assets, they choose air platforms. But France doesn't have large strategic bombers like US, Russia, or China. So they developed the Storm Shadow, possibly one of the world's smallest LACMs, to fit into their Rafales. Since India doesn't have strategic bombers and its own long ranged LACM, the Storm Shadow is a stop gap solution.

China follows the US and Russian doctrine of firing long ranged LACM from strategic bombers faraway from enemy defences. Because they can. Its tried and tested. So far I haven't heard any military analyst claiming that a Rafale launching a Storm Shadow is better than a Tu-160 launching a Kh-101.

The Storm Shadow isn't a Tomahawk; it is capable of terrain-hugging flight like the Tomahawk but is arguably much stealthier. The French "Tomahawk" is actually the MdCN which supposedly shares quite a bit of technology with the SCALP/Storm Shadow.

The point is, the IAF has the ability to hit PLA and PLAAF facilities that in turn could severely hamper PLA/AF operations in a potential conflict. The PLAAF can deploy CJ-10Ks if it wishes but you don't defend against cruise missiles with your own cruise missiles.

Well as I have said earlier. The Storm Shadows have been taken out in combat by antiquated S-125 SAMs in Syria. Their stealth is overrated. Old Russian radars could see and engage them. The Chinese HQ radars and missiles are more than capable of shooting these missiles down.

Sorry, but this is a seriously shortsighted statement. Where are reports that the S-125 took out Storm Shadows, and if they're valid (huge doubt here), how can we be certain that this isn't due to some technical mishap with the ALCM? And even if a few Storm Shadows were indeed lost to legacy radars and air defenses, how is it appropriate to assume that most of these missiles would suffer the same fate?

On top of that. China does use a number of short ranged air defence systems like: Sky Dragon 12, Tor missiles, Crotale, Oerlikon GDF with Chinese upgraded 'Sky Guard' systems, and SPAAA systems. The PLA have more layers of defence against incoming missiles than India.

China and its people know that they are not fighting India of 1962. What do you think all that air defence deployments and drills are for?

Fair enough, but until the sh!t hits the fan nobody can know for certain how these systems will perform against a weapons platform designed to defeat these very systems upon their inception of development.

The real question you should be asking is. Does India and its people know that fighting China today is not like fighting them in 1962? India have been doing a lot of boasting like they are the only ones who are fighting modern warfare. It almost seems like China in their minds are still the Mao era Red Guards, running around armed with: Type 56 rifles, Type 59 tanks, manual targeting AAA, S-75 SAMs, Mig 19s, and Mig 21s. Becareful not to get too caught up into their 'Jai Hind' propaganda BS.

My argument isn't that India enjoys better prospects of winning a Sino-Indian War than China does, but rather that such a conflict wouldn't be as simple as some SDF members assume so.

What make you think that the Rafales can past the gauntlet of Chinese IAD,Assortment of ground based radar,KQ 500, J10, J11B Fighter Jet, HQ9B etc? . It is not like a walk in the park

They don't need to; the Storm Shadows provide sufficient range so as to permit IAF Rafales to operate within Indian airspace while retaining deep-strike capabilities.