Operation Sindoor and Aftermath (20 Viewers)

Ajatshatru said:
The only critical component missing in India’s military-industrial complex is an indigenous aero engine. It’s not that India isn’t working on it—the Kaveri engine, in my view, is already a success, especially since its dry variant is expected to power the GHATAK UCAV. Once I see the dry Kaveri operational on GHATAK, I’ll consider the Kaveri program a definitive success.
Click to expand...
Now that ISRO is involved in making Kaveri afterburner stage, its a matter of when, not if, we have Kaveri meet its intial specs to full degree. Kaveri is a success in the dry stage, its like 75% there in the wet stage and ISRO recently said its partnering up to make the afterburner section - which i think they should be able to eventually solve, since they make cryogenic engines who's nozzles are almost as high grade materials as jet engine afterburners ( jet engines are fancier than cryo-engine in 4++ engine generation). While the science itself may be different, what is encouraging, is that ISRO is by far the highest technical standard of high grade PROVEN metallurgy in India and at the very least, i am hopeful that the collaboration with the highest standard fabricator in India will be sufficient to get us over the hump.
 
Ajatshatru said:
Missiles and drones are becoming increasingly important in modern warfare, but Indian Air Force should still maintain a minimum of 45 squadrons.
Click to expand...
The 42 squadron requirement was from the 2000s. We need at least 55-60 squadrons if we want to effectively tackle China and Pakistan at the same time. 10 squadrons of AMCA, 15 of Tejas Mk.2 and replacing the Mig-21s, Mirage 2ks and Jaguars with Tejas Mk1A. If we have this by 2040, we would've done a decent job.
 
Decahex said:
The 42 squadron requirement was from the 2000s. We need at least 55-60 squadrons if we want to effectively tackle China and Pakistan at the same time. 10 squadrons of AMCA, 15 of Tejas Mk.2 and replacing the Mig-21s, Mirage 2ks and Jaguars with Tejas Mk1A. If we have this by 2040, we would've done a decent job.
Click to expand...
bear in mind, india also uses 'mid size' default number for squadron size - 18 per in 'default' as opposed to long squadrons -24 per default like PLAAF or USAF or RuAF. so our actual numbers are also significantly lesser even if we match squadron for squadron.
 
Reposting probable (>85% confidence) losses of PAF during Operation Sindoor

  • PAF Dassault Falcon 20 EW aircraft - No 24 Blinders Squadron
- Nose wheel assembly

1748245507380.webp
1748245498943.webp

  • JF 17 BLK II/III
- RD 93 series engine
- Refueling Probe
- DSI engine inlet and anti-FOD taxing/ground inlet holes
- Nose Radome Cone

1748245706335.webp
1748245756873.webp
1748245845150.webp
1748245788944.webp

  • Mirage III ROSE
- ATAR 9 Engine
- PAF Pilot POW

GqzC07uXQAEcfmG

1748246126632.webp

  • C130H
GqprPJKWQAEPaMf


  • F 16C/D

View: https://x.com/xe0n13/status/1922221064936915138/photo/2

  • SAAB-2000 Erieye AWACS

View: https://x.com/TheNavroopSingh/status/1923198126489239658
 
Last edited:
ezsasa said:

‘Not interested in warfare with Pakistan, rather be left alone to grow our economy,' Tharoor​



View: https://youtu.be/eP89ysV9I0k
Click to expand...

We should take this as BJP government's official policy. Their main focus is economy. Talks of capturing PoK are for domestic audience consumption only. surgical strike,balakot attack, operation sindoor are just to maintain Modi's strong man image. Beyond that ,Current government has no long term war/offensive plan
 
Anants said:
China is likely to first confront India. The way the USA intervened on behalf of Pakistan, and the speed with which it reached a tariff agreement with China, has given Beijing new confidence. China now believes that, aside from some material support and limited intelligence sharing, the US will not significantly intervene in an India-China conflict.

China may choose to engage India first to test its military capabilities and strategies. Tibet and the surrounding geography offer a strategic advantage for launching a short, quick conflict aimed at boosting domestic and international confidence.

But, we are not adequately prepared. Our military focus has remained too Pakistan-centric, and our response to China's moves has been as dismissive as Pakistan’s typical reactions to India. I'm not saying we can't take them on—I believe we can. But we are not preparing fast enough, largely because we don't believe a confrontation is imminent or their reponse is going to be anything different from Pakistan. That mindset needs to change, and urgently.
Click to expand...
China may or may not go to a war with India, with the kind of geography we have with China at most it can make an aggressive land grabbing fight is in the North East. China India case is such that it cannot just bomb out Indian cities without getting any serious escalation from our side.

Our National Security aim should be -
1. Internal Security - finish off naxals, almost already done. then to solve the 0.5%, that is to kick out Bangladeshis, work on demographics issues and to reeducate gaddars, work on economy andother things to bring national unity and inclusivity. Internal security should be priority; empires are not defeated in war but are defeated by their own internal contradictions, whether you see the Mauryas or Roman empire or the latest USSR.
2. Pakistan and Bangladesh front should be made such that, Bangladesh is done and dusted in 3 days and completely reigned by end of week. And in case of Pakistan it should be 7-10 days of intense fight =, triggering its demise, followed by one or two weeks of campaigns to completely reign it post military defeat, so that we have enough time, energy and resource to fight a passive aggressive war against China.
3. China front should be a defensive posture taking help of geography. Our end goal with China is not to regain land, or for that matter neither it is China's 1000 year old civilisational war against us or us against them. Any fight against China is not going to be one that ends us. China will try to contain us, we will try to outcompete them. A 1000 year old history shows that war against India has never come from the north, it has always come from the west, for two reasons, one colonisation and two for religious conversion, either by Muslims or by Christian europe (now effectively United States). China will most likely help Pakistan, it will most likely whip up our contradictions, but would never have the same hatrade or cunningness as the other 2.
 
Selvam91 said:
We should take this as BJP government's official policy. Their main focus is economy. Talks of capturing PoK are for domestic audience consumption only. surgical strike,balakot attack, operation sindoor are just to maintain Modi's strong man image. Beyond that ,Current government has no long term war/offensive plan
Click to expand...

you do realise that "modi's strong man image" is a phrase used both within and outside India by publications and commentators that exclusively amplify anti India narratives. these are the same ones who talked about teaching modi a lesson during and after last general elections.

is it the case that, you get anxious when you see a prime minister of India has a strong man image ?
 
Anants said:
China is likely to first confront India. The way the USA intervened on behalf of Pakistan, and the speed with which it reached a tariff agreement with China, has given Beijing new confidence. China now believes that, aside from some material support and limited intelligence sharing, the US will not significantly intervene in an India-China conflict.

China may choose to engage India first to test its military capabilities and strategies. Tibet and the surrounding geography offer a strategic advantage for launching a short, quick conflict aimed at boosting domestic and international confidence.

But, we are not adequately prepared. Our military focus has remained too Pakistan-centric, and our response to China's moves has been as dismissive as Pakistan’s typical reactions to India. I'm not saying we can't take them on—I believe we can. But we are not preparing fast enough, largely because we don't believe a confrontation is imminent or their reponse is going to be anything different from Pakistan. That mindset needs to change, and urgently.
Click to expand...
For China to boost domestic confidence, they must take either a big chunk of land- several thousand sq kms - or tawang and hold it. China only attacks if China is **SURE** it can do this. Because China runs a 100 Bn surplus with India per annum- thats 100 Bn per year into China's pocket from us - that will go up in a puff of smoke if China attacks us.
So a Chinese operation sindoor + tiny salami slicing wont cut it, especially now that we are reasonably confident we can Brahmos them along the Tibet frontier too if they bring their AF or ADS to bear against our choppers and stuff.
They will need another Aksai Chin or Tawang to boost domestic confidence. But unfortunately for China, there is no easy egress left into Indian held land, which is flat and open like Aksai Chin- its montane territory where they can easily get trapped or outflanked by domestic deployments and whatever China says, China knows thanks to Pakis, we are bout 10x more experienced in Montane combat than the PLA is.
So China isnt exactly in reach of an easy low-hanging fruit to gloat to home about -the only one is tawang but even tawang is not safe if Bhutan is not in China's pocket AND its left undefended because Tawang can be easily bombed by us in return from anywhere in India too.

So China doesnt attack us in a major war, till this calculus is met or unless China goes back to the 2012 glory days of 10% gdp growth again and is swiming in dollars
 
Nicky said:
China has nothing to offer, the US won't offer without us sacrificing autonomy or with heavy restrictions like they tried to put when we went for S400.
Click to expand...
China has one thing to offer and we do ally with China on this - climate cooperation, where the west tries to fuck over our industries with carbon tax BS and emissions crap. yes, its a marriage of convinience for now and as soon as china starts to transition to high income economy ( if it does), it will flip and go anti-climate for us, but for now, this is what China has to offer us. What China offers us, is more valuable by virtue of its existence - USA knows, it cant antagonise us TOO much, else we may be pushed into China's arms and certain US moves- like trying to get a base in Myanmar or Bangladesh- indo-chinese backyard- may just see some off the books cooperation between India and China-so China's main value to us, is to be a power-check on USA for us.

Nicky said:
Unlikely, Hamas still has positive feedback and many western governments back it, inspite of what they did on 7th October and then still keeping hostages.

Feminists will not decry Islam no matter what it does.
Click to expand...
This is true, i forgot about this.
 
assassin162 said:
China may or may not go to a war with India, with the kind of geography we have with China at most it can make an aggressive land grabbing fight is in the North East. China India case is such that it cannot just bomb out Indian cities without getting any serious escalation from our side.

Our National Security aim should be -
1. Internal Security - finish off naxals, almost already done. then to solve the 0.5%, that is to kick out Bangladeshis, work on demographics issues and to reeducate gaddars, work on economy andother things to bring national unity and inclusivity. Internal security should be priority; empires are not defeated in war but are defeated by their own internal contradictions, whether you see the Mauryas or Roman empire or the latest USSR.
2. Pakistan and Bangladesh front should be made such that, Bangladesh is done and dusted in 3 days and completely reigned by end of week. And in case of Pakistan it should be 7-10 days of intense fight =, triggering its demise, followed by one or two weeks of campaigns to completely reign it post military defeat, so that we have enough time, energy and resource to fight a passive aggressive war against China.
3. China front should be a defensive posture taking help of geography. Our end goal with China is not to regain land, or for that matter neither it is China's 1000 year old civilisational war against us or us against them. Any fight against China is not going to be one that ends us. China will try to contain us, we will try to outcompete them. A 1000 year old history shows that war against India has never come from the north, it has always come from the west, for two reasons, one colonisation and two for religious conversion, either by Muslims or by Christian europe (now effectively United States). China will most likely help Pakistan, it will most likely whip up our contradictions, but would never have the same hatrade or cunningness as the other 2.
Click to expand...
I have always had the same mindset, that we need to have a strong defensive posture against the Northern threat. But lately, I've started thinking that maybe our best defence would be to keep the Chinese on the backfoot. Be aggressive, cultivate a serious offensive ability against the Chinese.

Because in a defensive posture, the Chinese have the peace of mind that any war will be initiated by them and that even if they lose a war, the loss would not mean loss of territory, nor will they take a hit to their strategic targets unlike what we just did to Pakistan. They know that a loss against us merely means that we managed to fight them to a standstill. We need to rob the Chinese strategic planners of this peace of mind. That is the lesson in deterrence from OpSindoor that must be applied on our Northern Front. And this is not a tactical or an operational goal. This has the potential to affect the Grand Strategy of the enemy.

But how to do it? Out of the capabilities we can develop:-
>A Strike Corps leading a ground invasion into China is the hardest to achieve given our already massive Army size. We can't raise more units. What we have now is barely sufficient for a two front war. So the only way to do that is to decisively defeat Pak enough to be able to do a 2020 I Strike Corps type transfer of formations from Western front to Northern front. And this involves a complete change in equipment and training, not just an air force style pivot between the fronts.

>An offensive air campaign capability. This is medium hardness. PLAAF is better than us in density of AD, EW and AEW&CS. In quality of jets, we are behind but closing the gap. In quantity of jets, we are level in a short war and woefully unprepared in a long war. And we are losing edge due to more numerous Chinese airbases and their improved hardening which is catching up to ours. As long as our CATS and AMCA come online at least, this is a non starter.

>An offensive missile campaign. Lowest hanging fruit, but still has significant challenges. Their AD had weaknesses but they are no Pakistan. The sheer density of their AD assets is much more than our own, look at their orbat. And they have an IADS supplied by an endless capacity of their military industry. In addition to their AD, the number of and distance to targets is also enormous. Most are outside our missile reach. And our missiles are in perpetual trials, lack in magazine capacity, lack in range and lack in aerial strike platforms for launch. And this is the lowest hanging fruit.

Let me clarify, I am not talking about tactical targets, I am talking about strategic ones. Like Chengdu.

And there is the Cyber dimension that I completely neglected because frankly I have very little idea about it.

Overall, achieving what I suggest currently seems difficult if not outright impossible. But in our military perspective planning of 15 years hence, this must be a major goal. To take peace away from the mind of the Chinese planner. To establish deterrence.
 
Last edited:
GaudaNaresh said:
China has one thing to offer and we do ally with China on this - climate cooperation, where the west tries to fuck over our industries with carbon tax BS and emissions crap. yes, its a marriage of convinience for now and as soon as china starts to transition to high income economy ( if it does), it will flip and go anti-climate for us, but for now, this is what China has to offer us. What China offers us, is more valuable by virtue of its existence - USA knows, it cant antagonise us TOO much, else we may be pushed into China's arms and certain US moves- like trying to get a base in Myanmar or Bangladesh- indo-chinese backyard- may just see some off the books cooperation between India and China-so China's main value to us, is to be a power-check on USA for us.

This is true, i forgot about this.
Click to expand...

Climate change has lost a lot of it's momentum. No alternative energy source save for nuclear is dependable throughout the year. Also, only the dumb Democratic party pushes for it.

Our differences with Chini are the worst kind, territorial. I don't see any positive movement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 13 (members: 0, guests: 13)

Similar threads

S
  • Sticky
Operation Sindoor Official Statement and News Sources. (No Chit Chat)
2
Replies
27
Views
8K
ezsasa
ezsasa
SKC
Rescue Operation in Wayanad
Replies
15
Views
862
VictorDelta4
VictorDelta4
hit&run
Indian Navy's Daring Rescue Operation. Critical Chinese Mariner Rescued | India Today
Replies
2
Views
754
samsaptaka
samsaptaka
haldilal
Operation Shakti
Replies
0
Views
306
haldilal
haldilal
haldilal
Operation Brasstacks
Replies
0
Views
322
haldilal
haldilal

Latest Replies

India's Best Clothing store

Protein Partner

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

Back
Top