AUSTERLITZ
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,025
- Reaction score
- 175
- Country
- Location
''Wdf is terrain masking capabilities? We are talking about flankers who are gigantic on radars. Less bravado here please.''
Ever heard of low level approach,to evade radar?Noob.What was being said was that PLAAF is unable to enter territory with radar evading low level approach as TAR is a very high plateau region and they are detected on take off mostly.Low level approach is not possible.In indian side the terrain is masked by mountanous topography,giving excellent radar evasion oppurtunites,its also much lower in height than TAR side,so its perfectly possible.Go and see the geography of the region closely.
''Ehh, it was mostly won by the ground force.''
The IAF conducted numerous sorties destroying supply dumps and bunkers with guided and unguided munitions,in mounatnous region its completely diferent skill set and IAF struggeled during the start of kargil.Calling me ignorant while you didn't even have any idea that IAF mirage -200hs played crucial role in kargil.
''IAF has an edge , but it is nowhere as large as you claimed to be. You are still limited to a platform-centric thinking. Nothing indicated IAF has superior C4Rs compared to China.''
You admitted it urself in case of platform centric recon.Again nothing indicates IAF has lesser C4R capability either.IAF has conducted numerous recent exercises on network centric ability in last 10 yrs and the new israeli green pine and similar rajendra/indra 2 radars are state of the art.The green pine is used on the israeli arrow 2.And these will be networked with our PHALCON awacs and bars radar equipped sukhois.As well as our sam network.
''It is funny that you care comparing non inducted aircrafts like LCAs and Rafales and their future systems to current chinese jets. That is like someone compare J-20 to Su-30 MKIs.''
Read carefully.The su-30 mkis all carry OXYBOG systems,thats around 200 planes.Plus many upgarded mig-29upg and darin jaguars have begun to arrive.On the china side ZERO aircraft with this capability.Obviously PLAAF with limited understanding and experience of mountanous operations has led to this serious disadvantage for PLAAF aircraft in air combat and deep strike.
''Using GCIs to support a strike into chinese airspace? Muhahhahahah. That says alot about your lack of understanding of modern air battle.''
Again noob rant,read carefully.Its talking about intercepting and destroying incoming chinese aircarft.The scenario is you are the aggressor since we are status quo power.GCI is perfectly viable for intercept missions.
''They are short range SAMS''
Keep in mind that your aircraft will have to fly at low altitudes mostly around 14000 feet,due to lack of proper equipment[OBOG]
This is WELL within the range of the spyder-SR with a range of 15-20 kms.[15 kms is 50000 feet]Thats way way more than is required to shoot down bandits.
Akash is a Medium range SAM with range of over 30 kms.Again all chinese aircarft forced to fly low anyway are well within the range of our SAM network,You think IAF is stupid to induct useless modern SAMs after years of long acquisition process?These are perfectly capable systems.And in handicapped PLAAF'S case much more so.
As for AWACS exactly ur kj-2000 the only capable awacs in ur inventory suffers from endurance issues in TAR altitude,Turboprop awacs need uprated engine that won't be available till 2016 at least.And also are terribly vulnerable in offensive operations.You are not in a good way in terms of AWACS support from TAR for an invasion.
What ignorance speaking.The bulk of ur infrastructure and airbases are in tibet,without which ur invasion is logistically toothless.
Terrain isn't suited for air battle for YOU.Not for us,iaf has prepared well in this regard with specialized equipment for high altitude aircraft.
Leaving aside OBOGs and surveillence ability,Just see our new LCH .Built with specific ability to operate with full weapons load at 20000 feet,that means it can provide air support to ground formations at high altitude areas.Ur wz-10 can only operate at service ceiling of 6200 feet.LCH is product of kargil experience.
Our new purchase the boeing chinook is optimised for high altitude,rough landing operations.Again done with keeping NE border in mind.
The new C-17 globemaster has unrivalled cargo load plus very useful ability to land without airstrips.Perfect for North east.Your new IL-76s have no such capability and far less cargoload.
Iaf's preparation and experience,doctrine for high altitude operations has been far superior.
So keep saying 'terrain isn't suitable for air combat'.If your aircraft wanna stay at their home bases,fine .Not our problem.
The IAF will pound ur hapless advancing land invasion force and its supply lines to smithereens instead.You know what happens to a modern army without air cover........
Who was the ignorant noob here?
Ever heard of low level approach,to evade radar?Noob.What was being said was that PLAAF is unable to enter territory with radar evading low level approach as TAR is a very high plateau region and they are detected on take off mostly.Low level approach is not possible.In indian side the terrain is masked by mountanous topography,giving excellent radar evasion oppurtunites,its also much lower in height than TAR side,so its perfectly possible.Go and see the geography of the region closely.
''Ehh, it was mostly won by the ground force.''
The IAF conducted numerous sorties destroying supply dumps and bunkers with guided and unguided munitions,in mounatnous region its completely diferent skill set and IAF struggeled during the start of kargil.Calling me ignorant while you didn't even have any idea that IAF mirage -200hs played crucial role in kargil.
''IAF has an edge , but it is nowhere as large as you claimed to be. You are still limited to a platform-centric thinking. Nothing indicated IAF has superior C4Rs compared to China.''
You admitted it urself in case of platform centric recon.Again nothing indicates IAF has lesser C4R capability either.IAF has conducted numerous recent exercises on network centric ability in last 10 yrs and the new israeli green pine and similar rajendra/indra 2 radars are state of the art.The green pine is used on the israeli arrow 2.And these will be networked with our PHALCON awacs and bars radar equipped sukhois.As well as our sam network.
''It is funny that you care comparing non inducted aircrafts like LCAs and Rafales and their future systems to current chinese jets. That is like someone compare J-20 to Su-30 MKIs.''
Read carefully.The su-30 mkis all carry OXYBOG systems,thats around 200 planes.Plus many upgarded mig-29upg and darin jaguars have begun to arrive.On the china side ZERO aircraft with this capability.Obviously PLAAF with limited understanding and experience of mountanous operations has led to this serious disadvantage for PLAAF aircraft in air combat and deep strike.
''Using GCIs to support a strike into chinese airspace? Muhahhahahah. That says alot about your lack of understanding of modern air battle.''
Again noob rant,read carefully.Its talking about intercepting and destroying incoming chinese aircarft.The scenario is you are the aggressor since we are status quo power.GCI is perfectly viable for intercept missions.
''They are short range SAMS''
Keep in mind that your aircraft will have to fly at low altitudes mostly around 14000 feet,due to lack of proper equipment[OBOG]
This is WELL within the range of the spyder-SR with a range of 15-20 kms.[15 kms is 50000 feet]Thats way way more than is required to shoot down bandits.
Akash is a Medium range SAM with range of over 30 kms.Again all chinese aircarft forced to fly low anyway are well within the range of our SAM network,You think IAF is stupid to induct useless modern SAMs after years of long acquisition process?These are perfectly capable systems.And in handicapped PLAAF'S case much more so.
As for AWACS exactly ur kj-2000 the only capable awacs in ur inventory suffers from endurance issues in TAR altitude,Turboprop awacs need uprated engine that won't be available till 2016 at least.And also are terribly vulnerable in offensive operations.You are not in a good way in terms of AWACS support from TAR for an invasion.
What ignorance speaking.The bulk of ur infrastructure and airbases are in tibet,without which ur invasion is logistically toothless.
Terrain isn't suited for air battle for YOU.Not for us,iaf has prepared well in this regard with specialized equipment for high altitude aircraft.
Leaving aside OBOGs and surveillence ability,Just see our new LCH .Built with specific ability to operate with full weapons load at 20000 feet,that means it can provide air support to ground formations at high altitude areas.Ur wz-10 can only operate at service ceiling of 6200 feet.LCH is product of kargil experience.
Our new purchase the boeing chinook is optimised for high altitude,rough landing operations.Again done with keeping NE border in mind.
The new C-17 globemaster has unrivalled cargo load plus very useful ability to land without airstrips.Perfect for North east.Your new IL-76s have no such capability and far less cargoload.
Iaf's preparation and experience,doctrine for high altitude operations has been far superior.
So keep saying 'terrain isn't suitable for air combat'.If your aircraft wanna stay at their home bases,fine .Not our problem.
The IAF will pound ur hapless advancing land invasion force and its supply lines to smithereens instead.You know what happens to a modern army without air cover........
Who was the ignorant noob here?