IAF's Future Bomber

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

Future bombers of IAF will be discussed here

 

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

Is GHATAK enough for future antiship roles ?
Answer is both YES & NO

Above pic shows GHATAK is capable of carrying only 2 antiship missiles in one sortie which is less....


Ghatak is tiny and has limitations bcoz of its weapons bay dimensions and MTOW

So it might not carry BRAHMOS ER & VISHNU HCM ,Which is a big setback.

Weapons which it can carry are

it address today's requirements in both ground attack and antiship role...we might need a new bomber to carry 6-8 ER & VISHNU 🕉 HCM

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Should the IAF/ADA go for light manned stealth bombers, like reduced size version of B-1, B-2/B-21? We can call it ALBA (Advanced Light Bomber Aircraft).

 

[srev2004]

Should the IAF/ADA go for light manned stealth bombers, like reduced size version of B-1, B-2/B-21? We can call it ALBA (Advanced Light Bomber Aircraft).

They should convert old air India planes into brahmos carriers.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

They should convert old air India planes into brahmos carriers.

There have been animations & pics about using old big airliners or even military cargo jets, but USA or Russia didn't do it due to many reasons, 1 of them....
BBBBIIIIGGGGG RCS!!!
It is like announcing "I'm over here, come & kill me"

 

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

If they ask me to set specifications for future bomber

Configuration 1 "flying wing"

Un-manned

Engines
4 x DRDO JV engine with 75 kn dry thrust

Payload
6 x -ER
4 x Vishnu HCM 🕉
~15 Ton

Range
8000 Km

-------‐----------------------------------------------------------------

Configuration 2

2 pilots

Engines
4 x DRDO JV engine with 130 kn wet thrust

Payload
6 x -ER
4 x Vishnu HCM 🕉
8 x Lr lacm

Range
8000 Km

in short it all depends on DRDO JV engine & Vishnu HCM 🕉 dimensions

By 2032 our GDP would be 10 Tn USD & defense budget 250 Bn USD so bombers are affordable.....

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Is GHATAK enough for future antiship roles ?
Answer is both YES & NO
View attachment 17426
Above pic shows GHATAK is capable of carrying only 2 antiship missiles in one sortie which is less....

View attachment 17427
Ghatak is tiny and has limitations bcoz of its weapons bay dimensions and MTOW
View attachment 17429
So it might not carry BRAHMOS ER & VISHNU HCM ,Which is a big setback.

Weapons which it can carry are
View attachment 17431
it address today's requirements in both ground attack and antiship role...we might need a new bomber to carry 6-8 ER & VISHNU 🕉 HCM
View attachment 17435

There are +/- points of everything.
Since beginning, I've always been skeptical having mixed feelings about these boomerang shaped jets. Their payload is very less, like F-117. It is not that they're useless but once discovered they can't dogfight & will be shot down easily. Till that point it is a bet/chance to rely only on stealth. They might require fighter UCAV escorts.
We talk about SEAD/DEAD but 100% of IADS is difficult to destroy, especially mobile ones.
Pakistan is geographically thin & we don't need to go deep into China. So altough i casually mentioned ALBA above but i wonder that if UCAVs will be replacing fighters then IRBMs & Hypersonic missiles might replace bombers.
I'm obviously not expert on when to use bombers, fighters, ballistic missiles(BMs) to attack surface targets but i guess all the weapons carried by bombers can be delivered by fighters & BMs with different speed, range, guidance. BMs can have sub-munitions also.


We should compare R&D & lifecycle costs of IRBMs Vs bombers.

 

[Azaad]

There are +/- points of everything.
Since beginning, I've always been skeptical having mixed feelings about these boomerang shaped jets. Their payload is very less, like F-117. It is not that they're useless but once discovered they can't dogfight & will be shot down easily. Till that point it is a bet/chance to rely only on stealth. They might require fighter UCAV escorts.
We talk about SEAD/DEAD but 100% of IADS is difficult to destroy, especially mobile ones.
Pakistan is geographically thin & we don't need to go deep into China. So altough i casually mentioned ALBA above but i wonder that if UCAVs will be replacing fighters then IRBMs & Hypersonic missiles might replace bombers.
I'm obviously not expert on when to use bombers, fighters, ballistic missiles(BMs) to attack surface targets but i guess all the weapons carried by bombers can be delivered by fighters & BMs with different speed, range, guidance. BMs can have sub-munitions also.
View attachment 18944

We should compare R&D & lifecycle costs of IRBMs Vs bombers.

Bombers are usually sought for the sheer versatility it brings to your platforms plus to check for redundancy which is to say if a hypothetical BMD system is developed tomorrow which is capable of downing all such incoming ballistic missiles be it SRBM , IRBM or ICBM then you can always rely on your stealth bombers .

An extension of this line or argument is tomorrow if the enemy develops a system wherein stealth is detected & compromised , you have a bevy of ballistic missiles to choose from.

To that you can always add the age old argument that bombers give decision makers time to review & recall in case of last minute developments which you can't in case of missiles unless they come with auto self destruct system.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Bombers are usually sought for the sheer versatility it brings to your platforms plus to check for redundancy which is to say if a hypothetical BMD system is developed tomorrow which is capable of downing all such incoming ballistic missiles be it SRBM , IRBM or ICBM then you can always rely on your stealth bombers .

An extension of this line or argument is tomorrow if the enemy develops a system wherein stealth is detected & compromised , you have a bevy of ballistic missiles to choose from.

To that you can always add the age old argument that bombers give decision makers time to review & recall in case of last minute developments which you can't in case of missiles unless they come with auto self destruct system.

Both sides of Sword/Shield develop together.
China is ahead of us in Stealth & Hypersonic missiles but we will also catch up soon. Both of us have variety of BMs & also ABM interceptors. BMs get mid-couse updates so technically they can be instructed to self-destruct.
China's requirement is to fight with West due to South-China-Sea problem.
Our requirement is to deter, retaliate due much smaller & less critical regions of Ladakh & Arunachal Pradesh border areas. By less critical i mean not having busy business routes by surface, air.
I'm not worried about our forces dealing with Pakistan.
So in your opinion what should we do? Develop manned/unmanned dedicated bomber? Yes then what size, payload, range, speed?

 

[Corvus Splendens]

Unless it's a medium sized strike drone, I'll always advocate for manned bombers.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Unless it's a medium sized strike drone, I'll always advocate for manned bombers.

If medium sized then please give some size comparion & airframe type - boomerang / fighter type (shape,speed, payload). How do you imagine it?

 

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

Unless it's a medium sized strike drone, I'll always advocate for manned bombers.

Future bombers & FUFA would be together in sorties.....both being un manned reduces risk of life's in deep strike missions.......

Pilot cabin takes a good internal volume of aircrafts & contributes a lot to RCS..... so un manned configuration will increase Internal fuel capacity in even less RCS....

EMP bomb will have similar effect on manned & un manned jets

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

If they ask me to set specifications for future bomber

Configuration 1 "flying wing"

Un-manned

Engines
4 x DRDO JV engine with 75 kn dry thrust

Payload
6 x -ER
4 x Vishnu HCM 🕉
~15 Ton

Range
8000 Km

-------‐----------------------------------------------------------------

Configuration 2

2 pilots

Engines
4 x DRDO JV engine with 130 kn wet thrust

Payload
6 x -ER
4 x Vishnu HCM 🕉
8 x Lr lacm

Range
8000 Km

in short it all depends on DRDO JV engine & Vishnu HCM 🕉 dimensions

By 2032 our GDP would be 10 Tn USD & defense budget 250 Bn USD so bombers are affordable.....

View attachment 18943
View attachment 18942

These configs may need bigger/powerful engines.
You can do a little homework - find side/top view diagrams of & other weapons, present bombers like B-1, B-21, Tu-160, Tu-22M, line them up in correct size ratio in MS Paint or some tool & then we can get better idea of what we need & can do.

 

[Corvus Splendens]

If medium sized then please give some size comparion & airframe type - boomerang / fighter type (shape,speed, payload). How do you imagine it?

Has to be something like the Northrop X-47B

 

[Azaad]

So in your opinion what should we do? Develop manned/unmanned dedicated bomber? Yes then what size, payload, range, speed?

Whatever my opinion be , we're already developing the UCAV - Ghatak & flying wingman like the FUFA , CATS Warrior , etc . My guess is the UCAV is only a stepping stone to develop a sub sonic stealth bomber like the B-2 .

Our immediate adversaries are Paxtan & China but as our economy grows it won't be limited to them . In any case , it's my firm belief that our long standing confrontation with China will be over within 10 years from today & also that it'd be decisive which is to say I don't foresee another war between the two for a long time afterwards.

Hence , all speculations on what we ought to develop against China will be futile.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Whatever my opinion be , we're already developing the UCAV - Ghatak & flying wingman like the FUFA , CATS Warrior , etc . My guess is the UCAV is only a stepping stone to develop a sub sonic stealth bomber like the B-2 .

Whether it is our UCAVs or Russian, European, American, Chinese, etc, any aircraft not capable of dogfight becomes easy target once discovered. It is not safe to rely completely on RF stealth & BVR combat.
I think the F-117 & B-2 have been way ahead of their adversaries & hence have not faced a strong IADS yet. If they were spotted accidentally also by any fighter jet then they had been shot down easily.
ADA & HAL developing a bomber like B-2 or B-21 would require huge expansion of facilities & nation wide industrial cooperation. At this time IDK what to say if we need a bomber like B-1, B-2, B-21, Tu-160, Tu-22M. Perhaps instead we should divert funding for 6gen fighter & our own good IADS.

Our immediate adversaries are Paxtan & China but as our economy grows it won't be limited to them . In any case , it's my firm belief that our long standing confrontation with China will be over within 10 years from today & also that it'd be decisive which is to say I don't foresee another war between the two for a long time afterwards.
Hence , all speculations on what we ought to develop against China will be futile.

I'm curious how is that? Are we going to sign some deal? Are we going to give them some useless land & make the borders permanent? What if China aggressively comes after Arunachal Pradesh like Taiwan.

 

[Azaad]

Whether it is our UCAVs or Russian, European, American, Chinese, etc, any aircraft not capable of dogfight becomes easy target once discovered. It is not safe to rely completely on RF stealth & BVR combat.

When have traditional bombers ever had the ability to take on a Fighter Squadron in a dog fight against a peer adversary ? Hence a fighter escort or a tail gunner as in WW-2 . Alternatively it performs such missions once air dominance is established .

I think the F-117 & B-2 have been way ahead of their adversaries & hence have not faced a strong IADS yet. If they were spotted accidentally also by any fighter jet then they had been shot down easily.
ADA & HAL developing a bomber like B-2 or B-21 would require huge expansion of facilities & nation wide industrial cooperation. At this time IDK what to say if we need a bomber like B-1, B-2, B-21, Tu-160, Tu-22M. Perhaps instead we should divert funding for 6gen fighter & our own good IADS.

If gaining expertise is all about experience then our aims should be carefully graduated & calibrated such that the next challenge is tougher than the previous one.

I see no other avenue open except a manned stealth bomber now that we're developing a 5th / 5.5 Gen FA & a Stealth UCAV & if that is the case , it has to have both more endurance & capacity for payload as compared to the UCAV , at least twice of the UCAV if not more.

I'm curious how is that? Are we going to sign some deal? Are we going to give them some useless land & make the borders permanent? What if China aggressively comes after Arunachal Pradesh like Taiwan.

China's boxed itself into a corner making more powerful foes with its moves than friends. The way the chessboard is at the moment all the wars currently being waged have resulted in stalemates - the kind of stalemates which seek URGENT resolution one way or another.

That'd be ignited the day China makes a move on Taiwan which should be once the modernization & theatre-ization of their armed forces is completed which is scheduled to happen by 2027-28 .

So far it's moving as per schedule. Add to that tbe cold war ignited by the US under Trump , continued by Biden & now Trump's returned.

I expect the EU to join forces with the US to target China's predatory economic policies. How the CCP especially Xi reacts to it in the face of an already deteriorating economy will dictate which way the world will go by 2030.

I'm predicting Xi will make hos move for Taiwan by 2030 give or take .

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

When have traditional bombers ever had the ability to take on a Fighter Squadron in a dog fight against a peer adversary ? Hence a fighter escort or a tail gunner as in WW-2 . Alternatively it performs such missions once air dominance is established .

By UCAV i mean fighter or fighter-bomber, not pure bomber, no matter how they look. If they don't have afterburner they can't dogfight & will be shot down by 4.5gen jets easily.

If gaining expertise is all about experience then our aims should be carefully graduated & calibrated such that the next challenge is tougher than the previous one.
I see no other avenue open except a manned stealth bomber now that we're developing a 5th / 5.5 Gen FA & a Stealth UCAV & if that is the case , it has to have both more endurance & capacity for payload as compared to the UCAV , at least twice of the UCAV if not more.

twice? i think manned stealth bomber should have 4-5 times payload than UCAV.

China's boxed itself into a corner making more powerful foes with its moves than friends. The way the chessboard is at the moment all the wars currently being waged have resulted in stalemates - the kind of stalemates which seek URGENT resolution one way or another.
That'd be ignited the day China makes a move on Taiwan which should be once the modernization & theatre-ization of their armed forces is completed which is scheduled to happen by 2027-28 .
So far it's moving as per schedule. Add to that tbe cold war ignited by the US under Trump , continued by Biden & now Trump's returned.
I expect the EU to join forces with the US to target China's predatory economic policies. How the CCP especially Xi reacts to it in the face of an already deteriorating economy will dictate which way the world will go by 2030.
I'm predicting Xi will make hos move for Taiwan by 2030 give or take .

So in short you're expecting Taiwan war to happen before 2030 & Chinese economy severely weakened by it? Perhaps they'll be thrown out of UNSC also.

 

[Blademaster]

By UCAV i mean fighter or fighter-bomber, not pure bomber, no matter how they look. If they don't have afterburner they can't dogfight & will be shot down by 4.5gen jets easily.
View attachment 19004

twice? i think manned stealth bomber should have 4-5 times payload than UCAV.


So in short you're expecting Taiwan war to happen before 2030 & Chinese economy severely weakened by it? Perhaps they'll be thrown out of UNSC also.

They can’t throw China out of UNSC. If they did then it’s not United Nations anymore but an enlarged NATO and nobody outside of Europe wants to see that happening so fat chance of that happening.

 

[Nutcracker]

If USA aint retiring its B52, let alone the B1Lancer, literally giving B52 a latest set of engines, why should we limit our bomber's profile only as a stealth one. We can build a good low observability bomber with whole 4* 115kN engine like TU-160. We can use it to fire beyond 350km standoff, ITCM/ Brah Mos NG / Rudram3 salvos.
Let Ghatak take role for dropping GB or Rudram-1/2 within 350km.