mattHaving aircraft doing a nuclear role just shouts out “shoot me”
mattStill dont see any need for India to have a Aircraft based nuclear deterent capability if the missiles in the ground on railways and subsea are working.
These planes dont and wont really deter anyone worthwhile.
India already has most missiles capable of reaching most parts of Pakistan and well China, I really do not see that they would be cowering at the thought of a few S-30Mki’s with nukes crossing over when they have to traverse soo much land and probably so many air defense systems..
Also to allow the air contigent to work effectively India dedicated electronic and SEAD aircraft and aircraft that can go a long distance without the requirement for re-fueling to often (Tu-160s etc). And these aircraft would most likely better serve another target. Soon as the PLAAF see planes come over all of its fleet will be in the air if it hasnt already destroyed the airfields with the CSS-5’s and its artilary brigade.
Just because a 3 tier system suited Russia and US does not mean it will suite India.
mattWondering if all this effort/money wouldn’t be better spent on, say, reducing poverty, improving health care, education etc….
If you were to mention that India should change the way it spends its defence R&D money i would say good point.. but the above statement seems to be borne out of ignorance of the area or ignorance of history or both together.
Indias spending on defense as a percentage of its GDP is still probably lowest in the region. If you were to say something similar to Indias two neighbours with the higher spend as % of GDP on defense it would make sense.
Anyways back to the point its getting worrying the amount of new projects they are picking up whilst other projects are still uncompleted. Surely it dilutes the focus of the engineers or dilutes the R&D budget?
mattI thought the future bomber is going to be the J-UCAS.. X-47… surely makes sense.. why waste time developing a new manned bomber? Slave the X-47 to the F-22 and you dont even need to waste time making the FB-22… have a F-22 twin seat fly a swarm of 47s
mattIt is a shot across the bow of people who thought the world would suddenly be flipped…
Definately a good Idea about distributing the airforce.. I would start now and not wait for any kind of attack.. Have atleast a strategic asset placed in various countries..
mattThat capability isn’t anything new, I am surprised they even reported it. If you look through forum archives on brahmos its understood that that is its mode of operations any way and that it has the ability to hide its location of origin. Also don’t understand how its proven so late after being in service. Looks like miss reporting.
mattThe latest 42 MKI purchase for ~ $4billion should be a good indication about its ultimate purpose , they are mostly likely hard wired for dedicated nuclear delivery.
SFC can have dedicated squadron earmarked for Nuclear delivery and probably yes few selected airbases as Nuclear security is paramount for these bases handling nuclear weapons and segregation of personal/training and maintaining opsec gets much easier if its segregated from rest of airforce.
Yes it will be visible but some part of Nuclear deterrence needs to be visible it has its own physiological impact , infact most part of nuclear deterrence is visible barring the SSBN.
Without a long range strike capability from the SU-30MKI who are they supposed to be a deterent to?
mattwell this news really made my day!!!!
Strategic Command to acquire 40 nuclear capable fighters
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, September 12, 2010First Published: 11:54 IST(12/9/2010)
Last Updated: 12:23 IST(12/9/2010)
share more…
12 Comments email print
With an aim of increasing its lethal power, India’s tri-services strike force is planning to acquire 40 fighter planes capable of delivering nuclear weapons. The Strategic Forces Command (SFC) has submitted a proposal to the Defence Ministry for setting up two dedicated squadrons of fighteraircraft which will act as “mini-Air Force”, ministry sources said.
This will be the first time that SFC, which at present depends on the Indian Air Force for delivering nuclear weapons under its command, will have its own aerial assets, they said.The SFC does not want untested fighters but the ones which are battle proven and have capabilities to deliver nuclear-tipped missiles, the sources said.
The aircraft planned to be procured are part of efforts to strengthen the nuclear delivery system which right now is based on land-based ballistic missiles such as the Agni and Prithvi and nuclear-capable fighters such as the Mirage 2000, Su-30 MKI and Jaguars.Created in January 2003, the SFC is part of the Nuclear Command Authority (NCA) and is responsible for the management and administration of the country’s tactical and strategic nuclear weapons stockpile.
Attempts are underway to complete the nuclear triad by developing the indigenous Arihant class nuclear submarine and under-sea launched versions of the existing ballistic missile systems.
India’s nuclear doctrine envisages building a credible minimum deterrent for maintaining a ‘second strike capability’ which will be massive and designed to induce unacceptable damage on the enemy.
The SFC is headed by a three-star officer from any of the three services and is responsible for implementing directives of the NCA. At present, the force is headed by Lieutenant General B S Nagal.
The force manages and administers all strategic forces by exercising complete command and control over nuclear assets, and producing all contingency plans as needed to fulfil the required tasks.
The operational missile groups of the Army are armed with the 150-250 km short-range Prithvi missiles and the others with the Agni missiles of ranges above 1,5000 km form the nucleus of SFC.
I do not understand why they want proven “fighters” or has the reported gaffed? Do they mean India will buy a Tu-22 or something similar? Also makes no sense without a long range cruise missile..
Would the SFC have its own airbase? new emblems or something? wont it make for a more visible target?
mattBritish Defense Cuts Could Fracture Alliance
(Source: Lexington Institute; issued September 9, 2010)
(© Lexington Institute; reproduced by permission)
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/117964/british-defense-cuts-seen-harming-us-alliance.htmlThe British Government is about to complete its Defense Review 2010. Scheduled under the former Labor government, the review is taking place under the guiding hand of the new Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government and in the midst of the most severe economic crisis in Britain’s post-war history. The government has made it clear that it intends to close a yawning budget deficit primarily through deep budget cuts and that defense will not be immune from significant reductions.
SNIP______
The RAF could see its entire force of 120 GR4 Tornado fighter-bombers retired, the number of new Eurofighter Typhoons reduced from 160 to 107 planes and the fleet of 36 Hercules transport aircraft replaced by 22 new A400M planes. The long-delayed program to acquire nine Nimrod MR4 reconnaissance aircraft would be vulnerable to cancellation. Ironically, these reductions could make the Joint Strike Fighter program bulletproof since it would be the only way for the U.K. to have a viable future fighter force.
The report concludes that, “if implemented, the cuts will mean that Britain will almost certainly depart the world stage as a major military power and become what military chiefs call a ‘medium-scale player.’” In essence, this means that the British military would have to abandon any pretense of being a full-spectrum force and settle for limited, even niche, capabilities.
SNip____
Looming defense cuts in Europe raise questions about that continent’s ability to defend itself from all but the smallest and least harmful threats. The United States has long complained about the appearance of shouldering an unequal burden in the defense of Europe. If U.S. allies in Europe lose the ability to provide for its own defense, never mind to project power, then the future of the alliance is very grim. The last anchor holding the United States to the defense of Europe is the special relationship with Great Britain. Deep cuts to that country’s military could be the final straw.
Read full artical at link, interesting point of view. I always thought of UK as being more of a moral support for the US’s expeditions around the world rather than a physical support. (not to demin the amount of effort put in by the UK armed forces, just to emphasise that we are needed more for other reasons than physical boots on ground)…
mattDoubts over China’s ‘wonder weapon’
By Jens Kastner and Wang Jyh-Perng___Snip__ read rest at Asia Times Online______ key parts are below___
One of these is Professor Arthur Ding, a research fellow at the China Politics Division at Taiwan’s National Chengchi University. Apart from this assignment, he also holds the position of a professor at the Political Warfare Cadres Academy in Taipei. Ding spoke to Asia Times Online on the DF-21D.
Asia Times Online: The DF-21D can strike US aircraft carriers and sink them in a very short time. Will this development have an impact on the naval balance in the East China Sea?
Arthur Ding: This is the ultimate goal China aims to achieve. But technically speaking, it’s not feasible. That is because when the missile re-enters the atmosphere, its speed would be somewhere around Mach 7 [2,382.03 meters/second]. That is so fast that there would not be sufficient time to re-direct the warhead to hit an US aircraft carrier precisely. A carrier could only be hit indirectly by a special warhead, such as a fuel-air explosive.
AToL: How will the DF-21D affect Taiwan’s security situation?
AD: There’s no doubt that China’s military modernization does increase the risk for US involvement. Nevertheless, aircraft carriers are unlikely to be the only instruments the US will have at hand. As time goes by, many more weapons may be developed. If this is the case, China will be frustrated and disappointed if it’s only focusing on scenarios involving aircraft carriers. Thus, the DF-21D mainly serves as a psychological deterrent for the US.
Jens Kastner is a Taipei-based writer. Wang Jyh-Perng is a reserve captain of the Taiwan Navy and associate research fellow at the Association for Managing Defense and Strategies.
Interesting points..
mattIf you can’t even keep the place clean, how are you supposed to keep it going if it gets a couple of artillery shells put through the side, or even a couple of RPG’s?
This is a difficult and emotive point to answer, i only have a question which is how clean is clean?
and this is where my ignorance of ship operations will definately show, what does a normal ship do? If you need 70 people to run the ship do you add 3-4 people just to clean the ship? If not and you use some of the 70 people to do the cleaning then arent you diluting the effectiveness of the crew anyway?
In a lean civilian work force if you employ highly trained people you do not want them to waste time doing cleaning, you need them to do the multiple jobs they are asigned and you contract in cheaper labour to deal with the mundane. Why would you want to spend £39/hour labour on mopping floors
mattAir forces of Russia and India may hold joint exercises in the next few years, Russian Air Force chief, Col. Gen. Alexander Zelin, said after his visit to India.
“We will definitely hold joint exercises,” he said.
The proposal has already been submitted for consideration to the governments of the two states. The joint exercises, if approved, may take place in 2011 or 2012.
India, along with Venezuela, Algeria and Malaysia, is a major buyer of Russian military aircraft. The total volume of deliveries to these countries exceeded $2 billion in 2008.
NEW DELHI, September 10 (RIA Novosti)
Have Russia India ever conducted joint air exercises?
mattAMCA will go the LCA & Arjun way. While India has allocated only US$ 1 billion for AMCA but India is ready to spend US$ 6 Billion for Russian planes. The technology for PAKFA will ultimately end up in China. So India is funding its arch nemesis.
Note that there is no collaboration on engines, gearbox, fuel injection system, FBW, radar, IRST, ejection seats, actuators, landing gear, hydraulics etc which represent 90% of any fighter aircraft. India does not even have right to make its own simulators. India is being tied down to PAKFA with no right to go for independent engines or even a different radar. This is same way India has been taken to the cleaners in Brahmos, T-90 deals.
Now the last point is whether US$ 6 billion will be spent in India or India will pay the Russians to augment their own R&D at our expense. I can bet my last dollar that all work will be done in Russia. Things will go over budget and Indian contribution will increase to US$ 10-15 Billion. AMCA will be killed like Arjun/LCA vs T-90/Su-30MKI. All the money will go to Russian labs and nothing will be setup in India.
One can add that Russians have never adhered to DPP, so no offsets of 30-50% will be given to India. India will just get a label of JV for committing something like US$ 10 + 50 + 50 = 110 Billion in future tax payers money to Russia
The same issue is with MRTA is also there. in so called 50:50 collaboration, India has no role to play in Russian engines and no right to choose something different or better.
Take Brahmos JV, India gets to manufacture only the container of missile and fuel tanks. The seeker and engine comes from Russia. Only now engine might be made in India. This is also supposed to be 50:50 joint venture. In which India gives practically 100% of the money/orders while Russia gets to manufacture practically 100% of the missile components
All money going to Russian labs is not a good thing but if it gets India a top fighter then who cares…
GOI has to balance the defense needs of the country vs the capabilities currently within the country..
mattNot so fast that reduced crew is going to lead to trouble.
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2010/September/Pages/DutyAboardtheLittoralCombatShip%E2%80%98GruelingbutManageable%E2%80%99.aspxAlso ALL of the maintenance that is not daily or weekly PMS is farmed out to contractors when it hits port, when on deployment those contractors are flown out to a port to do that PMS as well. Hell there are not enough sailors on board to properly clean the ship, that is contracted out as well.
Pathetic.
If the Navy wants a 316 fleet in the current climate and economic situation it maybe the only way it can do this. No point in having a large navy when your country can be held hostage economically by its biggest competitor.
Nothing wrong with economising on routine monthly or bi-monthly routines or preventive works if it means you can keep an effective number of ships.
Plus you have to remember this is going to go on over a large number of years which means that if this does not work and proves that your seeming disgust at the thought proves valid they can always change it. But the Navy have to try and take the risks it feels needed otherwise it will never grow or learn it will remain stagnent and become irrelevent and redudent.
mattWith the weight issues on ALH and LCA why the Ell did they volunteer to work on the composite side!
This obsession with a two seater also makes no sense! Guess they want as many planes as possible for the nuclear strike role.
Anyone know what is happening about the SITARA? Much was made about the speed with which it was prototyped but seems to have died away…
Sign In
