Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Below is a post that was deleted as OT from another thread. I'm posting it here mostly as context for the updated map which some of you might find helpful. It's also more on topic since it concerns India.


It's a map of PLAAF/PLAN units with added units of neighbouring countries and USAF/USN/USMC presence. Here I used it to explain the reason for IAF's Rafales.

--------------------




Indian Rafales have nothing to do with hypothetical Pakistani J-10s. They are counters to J-16 and you can see that by which units receive them - the 17th squadron in Ambala in the Western command and the 101s squadron in Hasimara in the Eastern command. The 101st in particular is a counter to the 98th and 99th brigade in Lhasa both using J-16s. The 17th in Kashmir will also counter J-16s and J-11s because the distances involved don't allow for short-ranged fighters like J-10 to reliable operate beyond base protection.

India bought Rafales because it has no working 4+/AESA fighter and the only options available are: French Rafale or American F-16V, F/A-18E/F and F-15EX. The Eurofighter is out of the question because of British involvement which will be used by Americans to shut down any deals. Rafale was the obvious solution not only France is obviously an easier negotiating option but also because:

1) India has already implemented some French solutions to Su-30MKI to enable cooperation with Mirage 2000 fleet
2) Rafale allows easy transition to a carrier-based fighter which India will also need and here there are only two options - Rafale M or Super Hornet
3) France has made deals with Pakistan in the past it allows India to gain ground on potential intelligence cooperation

Su-30MKI are no longer sufficient because they have outdated Bars radars which will not perform well in ECM environment that will not affect AESA radars as much. They are a 20-year old design based on 40-year-old technology. Russia marketed it as equal to western tech becauuse that was marketing. Russia was seriously behind in terms of radars and then it got stuck after 1991. In the early 2000s they were still flying Su-27s which had N001 radar with limited range and single-target capability (!). Now Russia is doing the same thing as India except that they don't have working AESA readily technology available so they put Irbis-E on all Su-30SMs an hope that its antenna power is enough until Su-57 enters service in sufficient numbers.

These are the same lessons that PLAAF has drawn from their tests with J-10, J-16 and J-20 - what really decides the fight is not stealth but radars and EW.

Tejas Mk1A is supposed to get Uttam radar but that will still be an underpowered and underdeveloped fighter - a test platform, not a reliable combat system. Mk2 is supposed to enter production after 2025 which means it won't enter service in sufficient numbers before 2027, which means the IAF will have operational capability around 2029-2030. And China has close to 200 J-16 already.

That's the rationale for Rafale.

Pakistan can get all the J-10s it wants and it won't matter much since air power doesn't win land wars. The lessons of Desert Storm are exactly the opposite of what American propaganda tells us. As long as India outmatches Pakistan in conventional land force any marginal advantage PAF can get by buying better Chinese jets is irrelevant. They won't have numerical advantage to gain air supremacy and even if they did India has sufficient numerical advantage in land forces to steamroll Pakistan even with heavy losses. Pakistan would have to use tactical nukes and that is a no-go for obvious reasons. That's just how they ensure deterrence against India.

F-16s and JF-17 are not outranged by Rafales because there will be only 36 Rafales in all of IAF and as soon as a threat of war emerges China will put its forces on alert to ensure that only a handful of Rafales are available for fighting Pakistan. Aircraft have limited time in the air. Just two Rafales on patrol 24/7 means half of a squadron committed at minimum. And then ater a few days the wear on the planes forces you to ground them for maintenance. Strategically speaking India is in a much more vulnerable position in the east than with Pakistan in the west. They can't afford for any instability there because if you look at the map then all it takes for India to be caught in a trap is for "something" to start near Sikkim. The chokepoint will cut off all logistics to Assam, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh and you can't win a land war without access to the land.

And I still don't see how a Rafale outranges a JF-17 with PL-15s being directed by AWACS. At this point fighters in BVR are little more than boosters for long-range missiles. They don't even turn on radars because that's revealing position. You let the powerful radar on the AEW plane do all the targeting.
If Pakistan enables such cooperative engagement capability - which shouldn't be difficult considering the platforms and should absolutely be a top priority - then Rafales only become part of a larger system.

JF-17 is therefore an optimal solution because it develops Pakistani industrial base and allows for a more sustainable modernization of the air force. If Pakistan wants to improve its air warfare capabilities then - again, drawing on the lessons of ODS - it needs AEW, EW and tanker aircraft and not marginally better fighters. If they were to buy anything from China directly it would most likely be a long-range fighter like the J-16 so that it can perform strikes behind enemy lines and force IAF to redirect forces away from the frontlines.

If you follow PAF's evolution you can clearly see that with all the incompetence usually involved in government planning there is an idea behind the thing. Just like the ROSE program which bought up used Mirage III/Vs and turned them into nuclear strike aircraft. It was very practical thinking.

War is not a pissing contest. You are confusing it with politics. War is a serious business that starts when you piss on your opponents leg and refuse to apologize. People can get hurt in war. Only egos get hurt in politics.

And with that I conclude my remarks on what seems to be an off-topic discussion. That's all from me. My apologies for contributing to the mess but I needed to clear some obvious misconceptions.

--------------------

Again, sorry for OT before.

When did I say Indians bought Rafales to counter J-10?

J-10 is not a true PAF option as a counter to IAF Rafale (in my opinion) simple because IAF will eventually (and can afford to) buy more Rafales than PAF can buy J-10CEs. Rafales outrange and outcarry J-10CE. J-10CE is likely not as capable overall as PLAAF's J-10C. The rest you'll just have to reread my post more carefully before quoting on something I didn't even mention.

India bought Rafales to counter China's PLAAF edge AND give it a further boost in already qualitative and numerical superiority over PAF, overall. It's important to stress that while IAF no doubt has tech, industrial, and capability edge over PAF, it doesn't mean PAF won't bite off half of the IAF's head if an escalated conflict were to erupt. IAF responses in 2019 isn't a measure of what it could achieve over PAF.

Rafales individually are probably superior to the J-10C and J-16 as in two Rafales is probably superior in A2A and A2G than 1x J-10C + 1x J-16. The difference between IAF and PLAAF though would be the fact that PLAAF has hundreds of J-10C and J-16. China manufactures both by itself and is significantly more affordable. We won't see 360 Rafales in IAF, ever. PLAAF also has a far deeper and more capable network of supporting assets, access to far superior MIC, faster production and maintenance, more weapons available for those fighters, and J-20. India's rate of Rafale acquisition is <10% PLAAF's acquisition of J-10C and J-16 (the closest capability equivalents to Rafale because J-20 is another class). PLAAF already has more than 20 times as many of these two fighters than IAF has Rafales and getting them at a far faster and far more affordable rate. Not to mention J-20... more than 6 or 7 times as many as IAF has Rafales.

So if Rafale is IAF's plan to "counter" PLAAF, it isn't a great solution unless they can buy them for under $50M an armed piece and get a few new production lines running inside India so wartime trade and support isn't disrupted. Even then, the rates matter and it can't outrun the production even if it's producing Rafale inside India on several lines, all at less than half import price. Unlikely to happen.

Rafale is effective at further bolstering IAF's edge over PAF. It's effective at bolstering IAF's ability overall. The problem for them is that buying short term and minimally effective solutions for these sorts of prices is a long term shotgun in the thigh. When IAF completes Rafale deliveries PLAAF is flight testing 6th gens and flying >200 J-20s with Dark Sword UCAVs. All done for prices that are favourable and have gone back into China's MIC.
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
J-10 is not a true PAF option as a counter to IAF Rafale (in my opinion) simple because IAF will eventually (and can afford to) buy more Rafales than PAF can buy J-10CEs.
With 3 dozens aircraft bought for the price of 128, and limited production capacity on top...
Indians have chosen the single option where they actually can be outbought by Pakistan alone.
Rafales individually are probably superior to J-16
It's probable, but not very likely.
With it's huge prices we often forget that ultimately Rafale is a 1990s era medium-weight fighter, originally built for relatively close-range engagements.
Yes, currently it uses arguably worlds' best long-range a2a missile - and it can't even use it to its full potential.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Su-30MKI are no longer sufficient because they have outdated Bars radars which will not perform well in ECM environment that will not affect AESA radars as much. They are a 20-year old design based on 40-year-old technology. Russia marketed it as equal to western tech becauuse that was marketing. Russia was seriously behind in terms of radars and then it got stuck after 1991. In the early 2000s they were still flying Su-27s which had N001 radar with limited range and single-target capability (!). Now Russia is doing the same thing as India except that they don't have working AESA readily technology available so they put Irbis-E on all Su-30SMs an hope that its antenna power is enough until Su-57 enters service in sufficient numbers.

MKI while no longer a modern 4th gen fighter and thoroughly ineffective against any modernised 4th gen with the latest missiles and AESAs, it is still a highly capable fighter. It's more capable than plenty of fighters kept around in PLAAF and PAF. These airforces can't upgrade their entire fleet to AESA and integrated with modern missiles. MKI beats J-11A, J-10A, and should hold well if not favourable over J-11B and variantes of that era. It is still a deadly WVR fighter and has huge payload and range.

It's about the top end being able to secure a tactical advantage for the rest of the fleet. IAF currently lacks the top end and the support systems in numbers and technology to do that job more convincingly against PAF. Rafale is no top end fighter. It's a great counter to J-10C and J-16, probably beating them out overall and it definitely thrashes everything currently in PAF including the somewhat modern F-16s. The problem for IAF is Rafale is very expensive for what it provides and is an opportunity cost to their long term MIC progress. It also fails to really do much against China or even Pakistan since Rafales are still inducted in such small numbers and both C and P would see to it that Rafale bases and wiped thoroughly in case of an escalated war.

India hasn't formally expressed interest in Su-57 off the shelf but may buy in future. Russia will prioritise its own airforce for deliveries. F-35 is possible now that the US is far less enamored with it and ready to complete 6th gen.

These are the same lessons that PLAAF has drawn from their tests with J-10, J-16 and J-20 - what really decides the fight is not stealth but radars and EW.

Stealth matters a lot still, especially against airforces that aren't called RuAF, PLAAF, USAF. Even within those, stealth matters. Stealth would be mighty effective against IAF and PAF if either one has that edge over the other in meaningful ways.

Tejas Mk1A is supposed to get Uttam radar but that will still be an underpowered and underdeveloped fighter - a test platform, not a reliable combat system. Mk2 is supposed to enter production after 2025 which means it won't enter service in sufficient numbers before 2027, which means the IAF will have operational capability around 2029-2030. And China has close to 200 J-16 already.

Uttam isn't an impressive AESA. This isn't a fault of its designers though. It's India's first airborne AESA, its power rating is minimal since it's designed to work with a mid thrust engine on a light fighter that needs every newton it can get. The Tejas in isolation (without considering the context and history etc) is a decent fighter with properly 4th gen aerodynamics and a great mid thrust engine in the F414. It's just not been a useful combat weapon since it is so delayed, still in short supply, expensive for what it is, not particularly capable (JF-17 blk2ish? mid 2000s Gripen?) and require expensive and time consuming upgrades just to bring it into something a little more capable. In which time and cost, its adversaries would have crossed greater distance. Management and organisation.

Pretty sure China has more than 200 J-16 by now.

That's the rationale for Rafale.

Pakistan can get all the J-10s it wants and it won't matter much since air power doesn't win land wars. The lessons of Desert Storm are exactly the opposite of what American propaganda tells us. As long as India outmatches Pakistan in conventional land force any marginal advantage PAF can get by buying better Chinese jets is irrelevant. They won't have numerical advantage to gain air supremacy and even if they did India has sufficient numerical advantage in land forces to steamroll Pakistan even with heavy losses. Pakistan would have to use tactical nukes and that is a no-go for obvious reasons. That's just how they ensure deterrence against India.

Pak can get all the J-10s it wants if China feels it can produce those and they would be far more useful in PAF than in PLAAF. These things I VERY much doubt. Plus it would cost a monumental amount of money to introduce hundreds of J-10s into PAF. Something China would not be footing the bill for. I mean why should it?? China can do a lot more and a lot better with that money than giving away "all the J-10s Pakistan wants".

Different wars, different ways, different things that win them. Desert Storm era is over. Cyber warfare, digital warfare etc and new EW, machine learning integrated into networks etc etc, new strategies and tactics. China never shows these aspects of its modern PLA in propaganda shows. It focuses on the outdated stuff it's comfortable showing so publicly. Those domains are significant determinants and the mechanical firepower is there once the door is kicked down. China is engaged in a struggle to defend itself from the superpower (the real one, not self proclaimed). It doesn't really consider India outside of old school land war. I trust China would reveal little of its capabilities if it were to fight some small scale war with India. Lives are unfortunately plentiful in both India and China and I suspect PLA leaders would rather lose more in lives (but still win engagements) with old form land war with India than reveal strategically important information to the US.

F-16s and JF-17 are not outranged by Rafales because there will be only 36 Rafales in all of IAF and as soon as a threat of war emerges China will put its forces on alert to ensure that only a handful of Rafales are available for fighting Pakistan. Aircraft have limited time in the air. Just two Rafales on patrol 24/7 means half of a squadron committed at minimum. And then ater a few days the wear on the planes forces you to ground them for maintenance. Strategically speaking India is in a much more vulnerable position in the east than with Pakistan in the west. They can't afford for any instability there because if you look at the map then all it takes for India to be caught in a trap is for "something" to start near Sikkim. The chokepoint will cut off all logistics to Assam, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh and you can't win a land war without access to the land.

Rafales in isolation beat all the PAF and PLAAF 4th gens. In the wider context (the one that matters), IAF doesn't gain too much with introducing small handfuls of Rafales. PAF does have counter to Rafale in the form of numbers but IAF has a great deal of 4th gen fighters too. In an all out fight, IAF can and would very likely overwhelm PAF but at the cost of setting them back far too much and so they would never escalate it beyond a certain threshold even if they can win it. Their strategic calculus re Pakistan would always be to prod and push in limited engagements and be highly selective about its offensive actions while being blunt and brutal with its defensive actions. PAF retaliation in 2019 wasn't met with blunt and brutal defense because it was India action that resulted in PAF retaliation.

And I still don't see how a Rafale outranges a JF-17 with PL-15s being directed by AWACS. At this point fighters in BVR are little more than boosters for long-range missiles. They don't even turn on radars because that's revealing position. You let the powerful radar on the AEW plane do all the targeting.
If Pakistan enables such cooperative engagement capability - which shouldn't be difficult considering the platforms and should absolutely be a top priority - then Rafales only become part of a larger system.

PL-15 is a more capable PL-12 essentially. It's not a long range missile. Meteor is sort of the halfway between modern mid ranges and the old long range AWACS/bomber killer missiles of the Cold War era. PL-15 at most has maybe 10? 20km? advantage on PL-12 and superior energy management. Certainly a better dual band seeker (iirc) than PL-12 and more modern electronics - ECM ECCM. Rafale with Meteor surely outranges F-16 with AIM-120C and JF-17 block 3 with PL-15. PAF doesn't have CEC where AWACS or alternative airborne platforms can provide targeting and mid course assist for missiles launched by separate platforms. Not as far as I'm aware. PAF's Chinese AWACS may be compatible with JF-17 and Chinese missiles but the Swedish ones are surely not and both are surely not compatible with AIM-120C.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
JF-17 is therefore an optimal solution because it develops Pakistani industrial base and allows for a more sustainable modernization of the air force. If Pakistan wants to improve its air warfare capabilities then - again, drawing on the lessons of ODS - it needs AEW, EW and tanker aircraft and not marginally better fighters. If they were to buy anything from China directly it would most likely be a long-range fighter like the J-16 so that it can perform strikes behind enemy lines and force IAF to redirect forces away from the frontlines.

JF-17 is a good numbers filler. It is exactly the achievable optimal between PAF's needs in number fillers, capability, and budget. Spending yourself broke is worse than letting the enemy win a few battles.

If PAF buys J-10 or J-16 or whatever from China, it would take time to learn and train up for, take even more time to develop useful tactics and competency. It would cost a lot of money even if China sells at the price it pays for them. It won't be free. If it came to defending Pakistan from invading India, China would much easily achieve those objectives by sending hundreds of cruise missiles and ballistic missiles, perform cyberwarfare and EW. Would be far cheaper than giving PAF free whatevers and guarantees objectives to a greater degree than providing some free fighters for PAF.

PAF doesn't need J-10 or J-16 in that sense. Even if it is preparing for small scale exchanges with IAF. It would be wise to invest in the higher order domains I mentioned before or cooperating with China to develop a stronger ability to counter Indian aggression. In the case of Pakistani aggression, I don't think China is really interested in supporting that because if it were, it would have provided Pakistan with much more armory for free with the condition those all be used immediately on India. China, contrary to ridiculous indoctrination by Indian fake news and western frustrations, isn't keen to destabilise Asia without at least being able to control chain reactions. Since it knows it can't, it doesn't want one. This is shown re Afghanistan policy as well, a passive observer and uninvolved unless things can be in its control and even then, it's a passive actor. It is interested in maintaining stable western borders without losing sovereignty. A Pakistan India war would actually upset all that and flow into its investments in south Asia and central Asia, Kashmir and other parts of China's western border regions. Keep India from doing dramatic things, keep Pakistan from waging war, and both sides from feeling a need to. Outside actors may not be so keen to see peace.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
With 3 dozens aircraft bought for the price of 128, and limited production capacity on top...
Indians have chosen the single option where they actually can be outbought by Pakistan alone.

It's probable, but not very likely.
With it's huge prices we often forget that ultimately Rafale is a 1990s era medium-weight fighter, originally built for relatively close-range engagements.
Yes, currently it uses arguably worlds' best long-range a2a missile - and it can't even use it to its full potential.

Yes that cost premium pays for the capability it brings. It's more capability for sure but how useful is unclear. Certainly with 36 it's minimal even against PAF. 36 means maybe 12 ready at moment's notice and 24 or so serviceable given typical decent serviceability rates. The Rafale is complex and is no Soviet/Russian fighter. Engines are more reliable than Chinese and Russian though.

It isn't accurate to say they chose the single worst option because Pakistan can outspend it here for capability achieved. That hasn't happened yet. If PAF does buy let's say a fleet of J-10C and J-16 pairings armed with the latest Chinese upgrades and missiles, it remains to be seen just how much such an endeavor would cost Pakistan. If it were significantly less than what India has spent, then we can make that statement. India buying F-16V/F-21 (or whatever the Americans have called it) or Typhoons, wouldn't have been much less expensive than Rafale and wouldn't have any less corrupt dealings. Both of those alternatives are arguably less capable than Rafale (Typhoon certainly is unless modernised AESA is offered then say goodbye to budget).

So India has no real options. Therefore they didn't choose the single option where they can be outbought by Pakistan. Their position is simply unenviable BUT they have spent a lot for a boost in capability. That's a step Pakistan hasn't yet taken despite its options being more affordable while not necessarily delivering less. China won't extort Pakistan like India has been extorted. They saw and understood india's desperation for modernity in its airforce and it came with premium costs. This is the fault of india's strategists and long term planners. I don't think they have any. At least any incorruptible and competent ones.
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
Yes that cost premium pays for the capability it brings.
The current impression is that Rafale costs - at least in separate departments of its capability - are way beyond anything reasonable for a slightly dated - even if updated - warfighting platform.
With "Indian coefficient" or without it.
India buying F-16V/F-21 (or whatever the Americans have called it) or Typhoons, wouldn't have been much less expensive than Rafale and wouldn't have any less corrupt dealings. Both of those alternatives are arguably less capable than Rafale (Typhoon certainly is unless modernised AESA is offered then say goodbye to budget).
It appears that Rafale is indeed markedly more expensive than either of those options. While it's indeed more capable than either overall, the question if it is really worth it is a tough one.

But generally yes - at this point world has probably become far too peaceful for nations to weigh actual warfighting properties above prestige, political leverage, and offsets.
Therefore they didn't choose the single option where they can be outbought by Pakistan. Their position is simply unenviable BUT they have spent a lot for a boost in capability. That's a step Pakistan hasn't yet taken despite its options being more affordable while not necessarily delivering less. China won't extort Pakistan like India has been extorted.
Well, simply buying more JF-17s is essentially doing exactly that.
Both it and J-10 airframes are of similar tech and can produce reasonably similar results. And, - perhaps more importantly - similar enough to the Rafale.

India can't even reasonably settle on Rafale w/o significantly affecting other AF programs, and programs of other service branches in extension.
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
China is engaged in a struggle to defend itself from the superpower (the real one, not self proclaimed).

Here lies the heart of India's problem.

Their position is simply unenviable

Very much so. But it's a position of its own making. It basically burnt all the olive branches offered to it, and then burn the bridges as well.

It wasn't that long ago China offered and India got the chairman of the BRICS bank. (When you think it was mostly China's money). China and Russia bend over backwards to accommodate India in the BRICS. yet India decided to turn against all these under Modi in favour of the U.S. and the West.

China won't extort Pakistan like India has been extorted. They saw and understood india's desperation for modernity in its airforce and it came with premium costs. This is the fault of india's strategists and long term planners. I don't think they have any. At least any incorruptible and competent ones.

This is what you get, when you trade with the West, and the West knows you don't have any real choice.
 

Nobaron

Junior Member
Registered Member
You should stop taking that hashish. I will give you my opinion. PLA doesn't have balls for direct confrontation in east. Chimcom bots & pakjaabi can do all the propganda they want on social media ,fact of the matter & ground realities are something like this. Pakistan is going to get massive hammering in POK in coming months & years & chimcom won't be able to do s**t .
How about you stop running your mouth. I will give you my opinion.
PLA stepped over your whiny bunch at tibet, they ran away. Your superior British king gave you dramacracy, now you 1 billion colonized drama lovers are whining in internet to cover for your "army" consist of jobless bollywood stuntmen looking for rations.
You see, the problem with "ground reality" is that it can't be chosen,voted, opinionated. It is what it is.
And the ground reality is, India is a thousand kingdom beaten up into a single British colony leftover ashamed of it's entire existence of failure trying to find solace into it's new Brit lord designated identity.
PLA's balls are bigger than your malnourished peoples wearing costumes to serve people's fantasy.
It wont be good for 1 billion dodo to take westie designated freedom of speech in internet seriously & think that they are gonna defeat PLA with their opinion power.
After all you are dramacracy. Qualification & competence is substituted with vote & speech. I dont think those poor lil things are going to be match for PLA. You dont want them to be hanged upside down in PLA barrack now, do you?

a joke has something more substantce
I wouldn't be so sure if that joke is Endian armed farce. I would say more entertainment than substance
 
Top