Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Bhookha. Let's put that stuff behind us. Continue this discussion without trying insults? Let's start with BMD topic or whatever you feel like and leave all the mess behind us?

S-400 purchase by India is more directed at Pakistan than it is at China. China's had the system for a while and probably know it quite thoroughly. For BMD purposes, it is indeed quite limited because it is a terminal phase interceptor. The most effective means for already launched ICBMs or SLBMs are during boost phase or before re-entry. This allows for interception before multiple warheads and decoys are deployed.

I don't think any nation honestly considers S-400 or SAMs optimised for planes and cruise missiles to be decent enough BMD. China, Russia, and India all have dedicated missiles for BMD to intercept warheads in space. I know China has tested several a long time ago and ASAT technologies are very much applicable here too.

On another topic, what do you make of the AMCA program? This video has been shared on other forums. Do you think IAF will choose to have Rafale and AMCA as their top end fighters for air superiority rather than resurrecting FGFA?

 
Last edited:

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
I just hope AMCA is not another disaster. I think it is ok to invest in programs like this on a low level of funding right now for India. But the technology gap is seriously real. See how much resources China and Russia are spending on 5th gen engines alone. I think they should fund more practical and achievable projects.
 

BhookhaBhediya

New Member
Registered Member
well i didnt start insult business and I am not one to take it lying down more on this later.

Firstly AMCA, I haven't seen the video, but here are my thoughts on AMCA based on public info available over last 2-3 years.
Background: Given that there's a lot of focus on getting LCA right, as it forms backbone of IAF right now and IS AVAILABLE today. Full focus is to sort out the production rates and getting quality of production. IAF was terribly pissed with HAL the production agency since the quality issues that it faced with HAL Made Su-30s. Given the history of bad blood going by Mig 21 days esp 90s it is the top priority right now. That's why IAF accepted much more finished version of LCA than JF17. The reason I also mention is that there were some techs that were planned to be thoroughly tested on LCA end to end with, before moving to the next higher level, e.g., FBW, radar (AESA) and possibly engine as well.
Current Status: There were plans to have prototype flying in a couple of years a couple of years back. I will believe when it flies. Given multiple models have been floated and have been tested in windtunnels according to news (which I dont give too much importance, given Indian windtunnel testing are not at par with US, EU or even China). Tenders have been floated for prototype production earlier this year. However, I havent followed it since then. Indian bureuacrats make Zootopia guys look fast.
Outlook: My sense is there will be an increased focus on AMCA with teams transitioning from LCA to AMCA post 2021, once prototypes are flying and there is some clarity on Kaveri. That's critical. If Kaveri flies on LCA with French inputs, things will significantly accelerate on this front too. Right now the plan is to have the prototypes fly in GE-414 INS probably EPE (need to double check on this). What I heard from my source was that this could be different from LCA MK2. IAF also wants to avoid extreme dependence on US for engines too.
IAF is also not in panic mode for the following reasons
1. Given the defence budget, IAF will need AMCA really in 2030 time horizon when Mig 29 and Mirage and Jaguars will be close to retirement
2. If it happens, IAF & GoI believes they will be able to buy PAKFA/Su-57 on Su-30 lines, a slightly less matured product (Su-27 was far more mature). Right now IAF does not believe that they need Su-57. For no one believes India and China are going to fight a full fledged war.
3. Additionally, Indian govt may want to keep the option of F35 purchase open if dynamics changes vis a vis Russia.
In summary, until I see a prototype flying very difficult to forecast the timelines and the path that it is going to take.
 

BhookhaBhediya

New Member
Registered Member
To the point Rafale/AMCA over FGFA. My answer would be no. IAF would like to continue with Light, Medium and Heavy fighter. Su-57 figures in heavy end. It will be the replacement of Su-30. Su-30 is not expected to be replaced before mid 2030s so.
My sense is, if IAF has considerable success with LCA (IAF seems pleased now with the capability and ease it is bringing) and reasonable with LCA. There will be three heavies: HCA (a successor of LCA Mk2 but heavier), AMCA, and PAKFA. Given this space has requirements of close to 300 no.s even there is a space (leaving budgetary constraints) for F35.
 

BhookhaBhediya

New Member
Registered Member
Even though this is an indian military thread which is getting trashed right now, this is still SDF. So if you have nothing pertinent to post regarding the indian military. Then I suggest that you put a sock in it.

The thread's last relevant discussion was regarding indian military's ability to withstand ICBM strikes. As it stands, india has both the Russian S-400, as well as israeli LRSAM on order. The country is also working on an indigenous ABM program, however it is unknown what level of development this program has matured to. If anyone has information regarding india's ABM program, please feel free to contribute to this thread. If there is anything other than indian military discussion, well ... like I said, "put a friggin sock in it!!"
From what I read and hear, The radar part is pretty much sorted out. The key parts lacking/missing are seekers/IIR and efficient propellants required for it. There are considerable progresses in both the areas in last couple of years, but there is a way to go. Details are very sparse in media.
 

BhookhaBhediya

New Member
Registered Member
Good to hear India's well protected from both Pakistan and China. I guess we are at your mercy and the only reason India doesn't attack China and/or Pakistan is because they are just too kind to us. We should really appreciate you lot more.
If it were not, then we would have seen more terror attacks from Pakis, esp on mainland India. It has been close to 4-5 years since any attack on Indian city even the last attack outside J&K was in late 2015 that too on Army camp. As much as Pakis deny, the Uri attack was responded in kind unlike the previous govts. I heard from my sources posted on IB and LC that IA has inflicted considerable casualties (FWIW). Now frontline troops have a tendency to blow things out of proportion, but the fact that PA did not disclose casualty info in parliament is a good indicator that the number would have caused embarrassment. As for China if it was too strong, why they didnt kick us out militarily from Doklam? Couldnt manage to evict few 100 troops? The fact is china has never fought an insurgency, let alone a war since last 40 years. All the exercises with shiny toys are good, but the real mettle is in front of a determined enemy in war.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
If it were not, then we would have seen more terror attacks from Pakis, esp on mainland India. It has been close to 4-5 years since any attack on Indian city even the last attack outside J&K was in late 2015 that too on Army camp. As much as Pakis deny, the Uri attack was responded in kind unlike the previous govts. I heard from my sources posted on IB and LC that IA has inflicted considerable casualties (FWIW). Now frontline troops have a tendency to blow things out of proportion, but the fact that PA did not disclose casualty info in parliament is a good indicator that the number would have caused embarrassment. As for China if it was too strong, why they didnt kick us out militarily from Doklam? Couldnt manage to evict few 100 troops? The fact is china has never fought an insurgency, let alone a war since last 40 years. All the exercises with shiny toys are good, but the real mettle is in front of a determined enemy in war.

I think you are interpreting China's unwillingness to get dug into a stalemate (or escalated war) over the Doklam issue as a sign of weakness or incapability. Perhaps it is simply because resolving the issue by force isn't worth it. At the moment, the area is still disputed and China has got other ways to do Belt and Road. It isn't worth going to war, even one that can be easily won (let's assume) just to build some roads that will not survive anyway. I don't think you should read too much into that. You have concluded that China can't fight simply because they don't want to fight over Doklam. Doklam isn't Indian or Bhutanese so there is no "kicking us out" because you are not there. No one is and the issue has de-escalated and back to usual status quo. China wished to build roads through that area as part of OBOR but instead of fighting a potentially hazardous war, it has elected to pursue OBOR without involving that area, to the satisfaction of Bhutan and India as well. If one wishes to consider China avoiding war by diverting road building as some sort of victory, that would indeed be quite pathetic. No country on earth wishes to go to war over a road that is the tiniest fraction of an economic objective. If any of them wishes to use military force and take it, China will almost definitely fight. I think that would be the real test. Alas neither India or Bhutan have taken sovereignty so that issue remains in the air and certainly no conclusions about anyone can really be drawn.

As for Pakistani and Indian skirmishes in recent months, nothing has escalated either. Few tit for tats now and again but the real test would be to see if any side escalates. Neither has so again no conclusions can be drawn about the overall ability of their militaries. Inflicting serious casualties on Pakistan is hearsay and there is no evidence apart from some word of mouth from very biased sources. Even if they are indeed true, it doesn't speak much about IA being able to use soldiers to gun down some untrained and unorganised fighters. The only litmus test would be an actual war. The rest is just chauvinistic trash talking so let's both try to avoid that. We can discuss these things if skirmishes and disputes actually escalate to full-scale war then we'll look into who claimed what and so forth.

India's issues with its two "antagonising" neighbours are mostly caused by British decisions during and before Indian Independence. Pakistan border issues will persist and there's no resolution anywhere in sight. Issue with China's borders are also mostly due to the British. Historically, pre Raj India didn't really have proper borders set up anyway, especially with China (I may be wrong on these because I'm no historian but do remember reading up on the sources of these issues) and China's borders in those regions were originally expanded to Tibet by Mongolian Yuan dynasty. It's these two large nation groups that began swallowing up previously undefined or poorly defined borders. There may be resolutions for China-India disputes but both are weary of each another at the moment. China thinks India wants to become a colonialist of sorts and maybe its leaders serving the interest of westerners. This thinking was set in the 60s. India has issue with China's support of Pakistan and thinks China's got sinister agendas and India's current BJP leaders are also part of the group (mostly western) that is thoroughly opposed to anything that has the word communist associated with it. Though the issues are less dire than Kashmir.

All three nations are nuclear powers so full-scale war is risky for the entire world. Being so close in proximity, it doesn't take much to wipe each other out. This means arms races and military build up for the purposes beyond defending from each other is quite pointless unless there are wide gaps between capabilities. For now, there is safety in MAD. China's worries honestly only lie to its east. Most of its efforts are focused on what the US has been doing and is planning. India being a growing market for Chinese products means China wants a stable and productive region but not one that is overly competitive against it. This means making sure no conflicts are started or get out of hand. The real race between China and India is therefore economic. Wealth brings improvements to life and overall progress of technology. To overcome each other's defenses, convincing technological superiority is of greatest importance. So because there isn't one at the moment, it is safe to say there won't be a fight anytime soon. But in a conventional war, China does have numbers and equipment advantage which would be recognised by almost all non-biased, well informed observers. The economic war waged on China today is a bigger threat to the country than any military force. You would probably be a person who encourages these things because you see China as an enemy. Not because it is a genuine threat to Indian self-determination (it isn't) but that's a convenient and comfortable line to think. Rather the real reason is because China has in fact been doing quite well and improved immensely over the last few decades. So much so that its new gain in economic and military power seems threatening and because it isn't Indian. That seems more likely as the source of bitterness Indians have for China, even more so than China's support of Pakistan and Chinese "Communism" (which hasn't touched India), or the border conflicts in the 60s which is also half India's responsibility as much as some like to think otherwise. So the real hatred grew out of frustration that China being an unfriendly nation to India has developed faster in a direction that afforded it greater military power to protect its interests.
 

BhookhaBhediya

New Member
Registered Member
I think you are interpreting China's unwillingness to get dug into a stalemate (or escalated war) over the Doklam issue as a sign of weakness or incapability. Perhaps it is simply because resolving the issue by force isn't worth it. At the moment, the area is still disputed and China has got other ways to do Belt and Road. It isn't worth going to war, even one that can be easily won (let's assume) just to build some roads that will not survive anyway. I don't think you should read too much into that. You have concluded that China can't fight simply because they don't want to fight over Doklam. Doklam isn't Indian or Bhutanese so there is no "kicking us out" because you are not there. No one is and the issue has de-escalated and back to usual status quo. China wished to build roads through that area as part of OBOR but instead of fighting a potentially hazardous war, it has elected to pursue OBOR without involving that area, to the satisfaction of Bhutan and India as well. If one wishes to consider China avoiding war by diverting road building as some sort of victory, that would indeed be quite pathetic. No country on earth wishes to go to war over a road that is the tiniest fraction of an economic objective. If any of them wishes to use military force and take it, China will almost definitely fight. I think that would be the real test. Alas neither India or Bhutan have taken sovereignty so that issue remains in the air and certainly no conclusions about anyone can really be drawn.

As for Pakistani and Indian skirmishes in recent months, nothing has escalated either. Few tit for tats now and again but the real test would be to see if any side escalates. Neither has so again no conclusions can be drawn about the overall ability of their militaries. Inflicting serious casualties on Pakistan is hearsay and there is no evidence apart from some word of mouth from very biased sources. Even if they are indeed true, it doesn't speak much about IA being able to use soldiers to gun down some untrained and unorganised fighters. The only litmus test would be an actual war. The rest is just chauvinistic trash talking so let's both try to avoid that. We can discuss these things if skirmishes and disputes actually escalate to full-scale war then we'll look into who claimed what and so forth.

India's issues with its two "antagonising" neighbours are mostly caused by British decisions during and before Indian Independence. Pakistan border issues will persist and there's no resolution anywhere in sight. Issue with China's borders are also mostly due to the British. Historically, pre Raj India didn't really have proper borders set up anyway, especially with China (I may be wrong on these because I'm no historian but do remember reading up on the sources of these issues) and China's borders in those regions were originally expanded to Tibet by Mongolian Yuan dynasty. It's these two large nation groups that began swallowing up previously undefined or poorly defined borders. There may be resolutions for China-India disputes but both are weary of each another at the moment. China thinks India wants to become a colonialist of sorts and maybe its leaders serving the interest of westerners. This thinking was set in the 60s. India has issue with China's support of Pakistan and thinks China's got sinister agendas and India's current BJP leaders are also part of the group (mostly western) that is thoroughly opposed to anything that has the word communist associated with it. Though the issues are less dire than Kashmir.

All three nations are nuclear powers so full-scale war is risky for the entire world. Being so close in proximity, it doesn't take much to wipe each other out. This means arms races and military build up for the purposes beyond defending from each other is quite pointless unless there are wide gaps between capabilities. For now, there is safety in MAD. China's worries honestly only lie to its east. Most of its efforts are focused on what the US has been doing and is planning. India being a growing market for Chinese products means China wants a stable and productive region but not one that is overly competitive against it. This means making sure no conflicts are started or get out of hand. The real race between China and India is therefore economic. Wealth brings improvements to life and overall progress of technology. To overcome each other's defenses, convincing technological superiority is of greatest importance. So because there isn't one at the moment, it is safe to say there won't be a fight anytime soon. But in a conventional war, China does have numbers and equipment advantage which would be recognised by almost all non-biased, well informed observers. The economic war waged on China today is a bigger threat to the country than any military force. You would probably be a person who encourages these things because you see China as an enemy. Not because it is a genuine threat to Indian self-determination (it isn't) but that's a convenient and comfortable line to think. Rather the real reason is because China has in fact been doing quite well and improved immensely over the last few decades. So much so that its new gain in economic and military power seems threatening and because it isn't Indian. That seems more likely as the source of bitterness Indians have for China, even more so than China's support of Pakistan and Chinese "Communism" (which hasn't touched India), or the border conflicts in the 60s which is also half India's responsibility as much as some like to think otherwise. So the real hatred grew out of frustration that China being an unfriendly nation to India has developed faster in a direction that afforded it greater military power to protect its interests.
How about I request you write in points, that ways it's easy to respond longer posts and accord derailing of thread. I will respond to this post too, bit very difficult to respond or from mobile in a train
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
I just hope AMCA is not another disaster. I think it is ok to invest in programs like this on a low level of funding right now for India. But the technology gap is seriously real. See how much resources China and Russia are spending on 5th gen engines alone. I think they should fund more practical and achievable projects.

Funding and infrastructure are necessary priorities for these projects. India's got the people and talents but I doubt these talents have been given the chance to develop enough experience and I doubt India has the organisation, infrastructure, and long term government funding for such projects to be successful - fielded effective fighters that can be affordably procured. We will see how well it turns out compared to Su-57, KFX, and TFX. It can be done, but can also risk bankrupting an entire nation in an effort to acquire a 5th gen indigenous fighter that won't likely be ever used in an actual fight. Money is everything in these matters.

All AF want these toys but few nations can afford them and even fewer can develop them. People still doubt China's abilities today but that will change in a few generations. The reality is apparent enough for anyone who isn't blinded by intolerance and hatred for anything Chinese. We've already seen KFX abandon internet weapons bays for good (ignore bs talk about future upgrades...no structure can be upgraded to house large enough bays without major redesign). We've also seen even Russia postpone Su-57 indefinitely and IAF rejecting it indefinitely. We have seen Japan bring out a demonstrator that was totally underwhelming and three years later is not being developed beyond a demonstrator and now they've gone with a US deal for F-22 like fighter or just F-35s then US 6th gen in future. The Russians were clearly ahead in this path than Japan, Korea, and Turkey so we may see them further scale back the abilities for their projects and maybe even abandon them in years/decade time. Essentially these things are indeed difficult and demands immense resources from a nation. All their models are basically even closer copies of F-35 and F-22.... every single one of them. Europe's smarter with their funding. They have F-35s and US protection from Russia anyway so they don't need their own 5th gens but their industries have begun researching 5th/6th gen fighter ideas, which is more practical and achievable given opportunity costs.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
well i didnt start insult business and I am not one to take it lying down more on this later.

Firstly AMCA, I haven't seen the video, but here are my thoughts on AMCA based on public info available over last 2-3 years.
Background: Given that there's a lot of focus on getting LCA right, as it forms backbone of IAF right now and IS AVAILABLE today. Full focus is to sort out the production rates and getting quality of production. IAF was terribly pissed with HAL the production agency since the quality issues that it faced with HAL Made Su-30s. Given the history of bad blood going by Mig 21 days esp 90s it is the top priority right now. That's why IAF accepted much more finished version of LCA than JF17. The reason I also mention is that there were some techs that were planned to be thoroughly tested on LCA end to end with, before moving to the next higher level, e.g., FBW, radar (AESA) and possibly engine as well.
Current Status: There were plans to have prototype flying in a couple of years a couple of years back. I will believe when it flies. Given multiple models have been floated and have been tested in windtunnels according to news (which I dont give too much importance, given Indian windtunnel testing are not at par with US, EU or even China). Tenders have been floated for prototype production earlier this year. However, I havent followed it since then. Indian bureuacrats make Zootopia guys look fast.
Outlook: My sense is there will be an increased focus on AMCA with teams transitioning from LCA to AMCA post 2021, once prototypes are flying and there is some clarity on Kaveri. That's critical. If Kaveri flies on LCA with French inputs, things will significantly accelerate on this front too. Right now the plan is to have the prototypes fly in GE-414 INS probably EPE (need to double check on this). What I heard from my source was that this could be different from LCA MK2. IAF also wants to avoid extreme dependence on US for engines too.
IAF is also not in panic mode for the following reasons
1. Given the defence budget, IAF will need AMCA really in 2030 time horizon when Mig 29 and Mirage and Jaguars will be close to retirement
2. If it happens, IAF & GoI believes they will be able to buy PAKFA/Su-57 on Su-30 lines, a slightly less matured product (Su-27 was far more mature). Right now IAF does not believe that they need Su-57. For no one believes India and China are going to fight a full fledged war.
3. Additionally, Indian govt may want to keep the option of F35 purchase open if dynamics changes vis a vis Russia.
In summary, until I see a prototype flying very difficult to forecast the timelines and the path that it is going to take.

Well I interpreted you calling us delusional in a single sentence post with no backing or explanation as beginning the insult business. I think that's quite accurate and fair to say.

Yes it seems AMCA will be built around Kaveri or F414 engines. IAF will want one engine for both Tejas future blocks and AMCA. I don't see India ever turning back to Su-57/ FGFA to be honest. Especially given Rafales in inventory and if deals can be worked out with Dassault, AMCA could benefit in some areas and make it a greater possibility. If AMCA eventuates, FGFA is finished because there is too much overlap and no way India can afford, Rafale, Tejas, AMCA, and FGFA all at the same time while other military branches need funding and new hardware too. F-35 for India is more likely than FGFA in my opinion. That's unless Russians get Su-57 into a finished product. AMCA wants to benefit off some purchase and at the moment it is more likely coming from Dassault at least as a first wave.
 
Top