Dhanoa's 'Plan B' and implications for Pakistan

[Darth Vader]

BMD is not 100% guarantee total interception of incoming warhead toward india few landed in Dlehi,Calcutta, mumbai then it will be game over for india @randomradio look US mid course defense shield, i read some US expert that If Russia and China fires 100 ICBM toward USA their BMD will intercept less than 50 ICBM, so you think you have better BMD than USA one @randomradio and reaction time also matters @randomradio

Hes living in a superiority complex
@randomradio
For you have a read will help your myths
https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/cold-start-hot-wars-indian-armys-new-limited-war-doctrine


https://thediplomat.com/2017/03/pakistans-non-nuclear-plan-to-counter-cold-start/

 

[airmarshal]

The time for conventional war, beyond war gaming, is long gone.

Paying media to fight a psychological war, inciting insurgency and backing terror networks in the host country, paying politicians to desist from undertaking water projects. Now thats war of the new generation for which Pakistan it seems is not prepared.

 

[ziaulislam]

Squadrons are raised with much smaller numbers than the full 20 or 21 jets required.

I'll give you a better timeline.

Old squadrons that will be operational in 2025
MKI = 13.5
Mig-29 = 3
M-2000 = 3
Jaguar = 4.5... There's 6, but 1.5 squadrons worth will be removed. Some will crash.
So that's 24 squadrons.

To get to 39, we need 15.
LCA = 6
Rafale = 4

So we need 4 more to make it to 39 squadrons. These 4 squadrons will come in through the main production programs, so squadrons will be raised in parallel. HAL is pushing for 3 more LCA squadrons to make up for any delay with MCA. Since these jets are new and the dangerous jets will leave service over the next 5-7 years, attrition will be very low. Attrition replacements will become important after 2030.

Then the 3 Mig-29 squadrons will go between 2030-35. If the PAK FA becomes available earlier, then it could even exit the IAF from 2027. M-2000 have 5500 hours of service life extension. They will be upgraded with AESA radar around 2030-35, they can stay in service until 2048. The Jaguars will remain in service until 2042. Jaguar upgrade configuration has been frozen.
.

1. i thought there are 2 active sqs but i will take your word for the third one, its standarad 4000 hours extention till 2035-2040
2. 6 LCA sq in 6 years that is impressive
3. jauguars, original plan was take these 1960 era overweight jet to 2030 by giving them new engine and AESA radar supposedly starting serial production in 2010-15 time frame..i never knew the engine has been selected and finalized (no engine no upgrade..)
4. i thought you have 2 rafale since when its 4? did i miss something?
5. and what other 4 squadrons, do you think you will select, upgrade, do serial production in just 7 years..you are really kidding right(by comparison to buy off the shelf aircraft it took 15 years!!) even countries with fast pace procurement like Pakistan cant do that

so basically you have wished up 6 new aircraft squadrons that we have no idea what they will be, restructured and correct HAL and mk1a to make 120 jets/6 sq (congratulations) and some how stretched the jauguars to 2030 and yet just 39
squadrons

39 squardons are enough to win a prolonged war with Pakistan which has 20 squadrons, a higher pilot ratio(2.5 :1 vs 0.8:1) and higher serviceability but nothing more, if these stats dont worry IAF against pakistan than you guys should fire who ever is in IAF...no worry should be PAF vs afghan air force, or IAF vs BAF.....

and when it comes to china, you guys are kidding me right, even their j-10 out number all the 4th gen fighters with 400+ in service(220 J10A till 2002, 180 J10B till date), for egt about the 400+ flankers, the JH-7s, J20s or the other bombers

and congratulations to both Pakistani and indians especially south indians, we have people on the top who think nuclear weapons are for bluff..i feel sorry for south indians because they probably dont even know what the "thing" between us..lol..

there you go rising india in dust of nuclear war, just because an idiot thought its bluff

PS:
I didnt even warrant to comment on idiotic BMD system argument

this is fun reading on mirage2000 upgrade

https://www.defensenews.com/global/...et-in-jeopardy-as-maintenace-contracts-lapse/
----------------
oh pilot ratio, which is crucial given each sortie has tremendous stress on pilot

Furthermore, the IAF’s current fighter aircraft to pilot ratio is 1:0.81.”Our sanctioned strength for [combat] pilots is less than that of our adversaries,” the report said, adding that the Pakistan Air Force’s fighter to pilot ratio was 1:2.5, IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly reported. In the U.S. the cockpit to pilot ratio is 1:2. Jane’s further summarized
https://thediplomat.com/2015/04/the-indian-air-forces-big-problem-not-enough-pilots/
---------------------

 

[AUz]

It's not just two-front war, we are preparing a multi-front war as any great power does. Two-front is the main focus of the current modernisation, but we will ultimately create at least three theatre commands capable of going to war independently. So there's nothing "idiotic" about it.



Surge operations are not expected to go beyond a few days, let alone a week.



Your assumption is wrong here. Plan B is for the current scenario, with 30 squadrons in a two-front war setting. In 10 years, we will have made up most of our squadron numbers, which is Plan A, ie, playing with the full team. We expect to have 39 squadrons by 2027-28.

In 10 years, the PAF will be up against the IAF's Plan A.



Naturally, the MKI can do everything the Soviets had designed the Su-27 to do, including operating from rough fields. So it shouldn't come as a surprise to the PAF.

hindu india has never been a 'great power' nor will it ever be. Only under Muslim rule, india could be considered a 'great power' because of Muslim india's integration and involvement in global Islamic order.

You see, great powers have global civilizational interests. Hindus never had any global civilization. Yes, some influence outside of their borders that stretched till South East Asia but that was quickly conquered by the dawn history's first global civilization---Islam.

Hindus have no global civilizational presence that would need the grand economic, cultural, and military network-establishment--and hence you won't be seeing any "great power" arising out of hindu-india.

Islamic and Christian-Western great powers had global civilization to protect and advance (only two civilizations to have ever been established on global level across multiple continents)---What would you be doing? Fighting Africans just because you feel like it?

Smell the coffee, you have been rendered irrelevant and won't ever be a true 'great power' since you don't have a global civilizational base stretching across continents and multiple oceans like Islamic and Western great powers did in past and still do today (U.S for example has intrinsic civilizational basis and foundation in Europe, Americas, and Australia!)

Tell me where does such civilizational foundation exist for hindus outside of indian subcontinent? Hell, even Muslim-majority Turkey has a much better chance (than india) of becoming a true great power with it's military, economic, and cultural networks extending from Africa, to Europe, to entire Central Asia and may be even beyond. Turkey has a global civilizational foundation (global Islamic civilization) extending across continents. india has none.

The best you can do is to try to become a regional hegemon in subcontinent (which is unlikely thanks to Pakistan's massively powerful military machine armed with nuclear ballistic missile forces).

Have you ever noticed Thomas Friedman's prediction always refer to india as a possible 'regional hegemon' with it refers to Turkey as a possible 'great power' as Ottomans were in past. Have you ever noticed why the choice of words? Know you know

 

[CriticalThought]

@All let's keep the discussion technically correct. BMD is a major game changer and it's efficacy has been clearly seen in the recent Saudi-Houthi conflict. One could argue that Houthi missiles are primitive, but then India is also backed and supplied by Israel, and indirectly by America. India is America's pawn in the Asian game and will benefit from access to latest technologies. And we have not officially deployed MIRV capability... YET!!!!

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

In my opinion, the India and Pakistan conflict is over. Both sides have played every scenario and its a lose lose situation. now, both sides hedge on a third party involvement in their high intensity engagement, or plan on low intensity conflicts or proxy wars. It is a never ending story where the OPS plans are recycled and copy pasted 60s onwards. Nothing new, and nothing to write home about. The espionage is such on both sides that each as the complete picture of the other. They both know the strong and weak points. So what will really happen in an all out war or high intensity conflict? No one really knows, as no plan every survives the battlefield. The continued saber rattling adds an immense tax to both nations and its peace loving majority, a drain on each nation's blood.

 

[PakSword]

Pakistan doesn't need to move its forces considerably in the first few days of the war. Pakistan will utilize over 50% of the missiles to exhaust the air defenses and inflict damage on Indian airports (not necessarily Air Force ones), power generation sites, dams, different industrial zones, etc.. This is to create havoc and it will surely create a sense of urgency in the response of Indians to take charge of the sites from where the missiles will be fired. That surge will be met with tactical nukes inside Pakistan, as nothing is more important than saving the territory by any means.

The war will not last more than a month as big powers will stop both countries through different tactics (including technological). In the first month, the country that has inflicted major damage will be considered a winner whether or not any country has captured any land area of the other.

That's why I say, Pakistan has to increase its missile capability (both qualitatively and quantitatively in the next few years.. We should have Shaheens and Ghauris in 10s of thousands in numbers, secured underground at a depth that is safe from any nuclear strike..

 

[CriticalThought]

Pakistan doesn't need to move its forces considerably in the first few days of the war. Pakistan will utilize over 50% of the missiles to exhaust the air defenses and inflict damage on Indian airports (not necessarily Air Force ones), power generation sites, dams, different industrial zones, etc.. This is to create havoc and it will surely create a sense of urgency in the response of Indians to take charge of the sites from where the missiles will be fired. That surge will be met with tactical nukes inside Pakistan, as nothing is more important than saving the territory by any means.

The war will not last more than a month as big powers will stop both countries through different tactics (including technological). In the first month, the country that has inflicted major damage will be considered a winner whether or not any country has captured any land area of the other.

That's why I say, Pakistan has to increase its missile capability (both qualitatively and quantitatively in the next few years.. We should have Shaheens and Ghauris in 10s of thousands in numbers, secured underground at a depth that is safe from any nuclear strike..

Saturation attacks are always a good option if we can pull them off. But the main point of this thread is that mere intermediate range threats will have no use. We need credible, reliable offensive capability to strike every inch of India. The question then arises, do we have the wherewithal for it?

 

[Taimoor Khan]

"With its own forces well within the safety of its own borders, India can launch a volley of cruise missile at Pakistani forward positions, especially airbases. Here, Pakistan is at a significant disadvantage due to lack of strategic depth. And because of India's significant depth, any potential Pakistani response would be significantly muted."


Pakistani standoff weapons like RAAD and Babur, specially if mated with TNWs, can make mince meat of Indian air force installation, specially their airbases all along the relevant war theatre. What if Pakistan strikes first and take out Indian airforce ability to support their ground forces? With land forces already pulled back, it will be walk in the park for Pakistani land forces.

 

[CriticalThought]

"With its own forces well within the safety of its own borders, India can launch a volley of cruise missile at Pakistani forward positions, especially airbases. Here, Pakistan is at a significant disadvantage due to lack of strategic depth. And because of India's significant depth, any potential Pakistani response would be significantly muted."


Pakistani standoff weapons like RAAD and Babur, specially if mated with TNWs, can make mince meat of Indian air force installation, specially their airbases all along the relevant war theatre. What if Pakistan strikes first and take out Indian airforce ability to support their ground forces? With land forces already pulled back, it will be walk in the park for Pakistani land forces.

What makes you think they will only pull back land forces?

 

[randomradio]

I highly doubt Hindustan would commit to full blown nuclear warfare unless we target nukes at your own cities, you wouldn't cause MAD for a reason as petty as your army suffering large casualties. Even if you did, again, we will response the exact same way.

Firstly, you don't have tac nukes. We can talk about tac nukes "after" it is deployed.

Second, according to our nuclear doctrine, we will go nuclear the minute you start deploying nukes to the theatre. So if you move your Nasrs around, "after" it's confirmed that they are nuclear, we go nuclear. Just the threat is enough for us to press the button.

Lmao your military will never be on a similar level to the US,

We will comfortably match them. I am talking about the long run. With $200B, we will match their current defence spending. And that number will be achieved by 2030.

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/05...hat-much-bigger-than-china-russia-gen-milley/

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/22/americas-military-doesnt-have-enough-money-to-do-its-job/

China's close to achieving this, and that's why you see the PLAN building ships at the same rate the USN does. By 2035, they will comfortably match the US firepower.

and as I said before, our economy is growing rapidly, so as a result so will our military. You won't gain a definitive edge for the foreseeable future (inshallah).

Foreseeable future is quite subjective.

It's impossible for your growth to match ours. We are already adding half your defence budget every year. In about three years, we will be adding as much as the entire Pak defence budget every year. In about five years, it will climb to 1.5x. In about 10 years, Pak's defence budget will be less than 10% of the Indian budget. And this is without counting the savings we will gain through indigenization.

Warfare is switching towards the rich and powerful. It's going out of reach of small countries with smaller budgets. For example, just one modern fighter aircraft will climb to $200M+ flyaway before 2030 considering current prices.

Hes living in a superiority complex
@randomradio
For you have a read will help your myths
https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/cold-start-hot-wars-indian-armys-new-limited-war-doctrine


https://thediplomat.com/2017/03/pakistans-non-nuclear-plan-to-counter-cold-start/

India's not under threat from ICBMs.

 

[PakShaheen79]

I don't believe that when IAF chief told about Plan-B, he was referring to any kind of strategic retreat. I think Plan-B has to do something related to IAF bases in Central Asia which provide the shortest path to Northern parts of Pakistan where most of our strategic installations are located. Strategic retreat is simply not an option for Indian forces, this will provide Pakistani forces to push the war inside India. In Rajhistan, that might work in Indian fav as the area is mostly desert but in Punjab, it is a too risky proposition.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

What makes you think they will only pull back land forces?

Raad-1 can strike at 350km (with Raad-2 strike range unknown), Babur can go even further to anything between 700 ~ 1000 KM. How far Indians are intending to pull back?

 

[HRK]

with Raad-2 strike range unknown

550KM

 

[randomradio]

1. i thought there are 2 active sqs but i will take your word for the third one, its standarad 4000 hours extention till 2035-2040

Squadrons 1, 7 and 9. The upgrade almost doubled service life.

2. 6 LCA sq in 6 years that is impressive

The production numbers will climb to 19 per year next year. And the two main lines of 8/year each can be expanded to 12/year at short notice.

3. jauguars, original plan was take these 1960 era overweight jet to 2030 by giving them new engine and AESA radar supposedly starting serial production in 2010-15 time frame..i never knew the engine has been selected and finalized (no engine no upgrade..)

Yes, done recently. Honeywell F-125IN.

4. i thought you have 2 rafale since when its 4? did i miss something?

We bought infrastructure for 72 jets. A second tranche order will be placed after elections.

5. and what other 4 squadrons, do you think you will select, upgrade, do serial production in just 7 years..you are really kidding right(by comparison to buy off the shelf aircraft it took 15 years!!) even countries with fast pace procurement like Pakistan cant do that

so basically you have wished up 6 new aircraft squadrons that we have no idea what they will be, restructured and correct HAL and mk1a to make 120 jets/6 sq (congratulations) and some how stretched the jauguars to 2030 and yet just 39
squadrons

We are working on it right now.

MCA is expected to achieve IOC in 2025, so the first squadron can be delivered in 2027-28.

Rafales are expected to come out of an Indian line in 2023. The second tranche will be a MII program. Dassault wants to set up a production line for the IAF's 36 and IN's 57 jets.

39 squardons are enough to win a prolonged war with Pakistan which has 20 squadrons, a higher pilot ratio(2.5 :1 vs 0.8:1) and higher serviceability but nothing more, if these stats dont worry IAF against pakistan than you guys should fire who ever is in IAF...no worry should be PAF vs afghan air force, or IAF vs BAF.....

What you should be talking about is the win-loss ratio for each engagement.

Most of PAF's 20 squadrons are pretty useless against the IAF.

and when it comes to china, you guys are kidding me right, even their j-10 out number all the 4th gen fighters with 400+ in service(220 J10A till 2002, 180 J10B till date), for egt about the 400+ flankers, the JH-7s, J20s or the other bombers

The terrain is so bad for them that their J-10s won't even be equivalent to Mig-21s. They have to take a 40-50% payload hit for each sortie.

And not all their jets will be available for all missions since they are not multirole. Not to mention, even they have to keep jets in other areas because the US and Japan will start probing Chinese airspace if they move their jets towards India during war.

The biggest threat from China is not their aircraft, it's their missile forces. That's why we are also prioritising air defence and BMD.

and congratulations to both Pakistani and indians especially south indians, we have people on the top who think nuclear weapons are for bluff..i feel sorry for south indians because they probably dont even know what the "thing" between us..lol..

there you go rising india in dust of nuclear war, just because an idiot thought its bluff

We can talk about tac nukes when they are actually deployed.

PS:
I didnt even warrant to comment on idiotic BMD system argument

The entire world is going for BMD. Some US allies are even risking sanctions in order to get BMD from Russia.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/...et-in-jeopardy-as-maintenace-contracts-lapse/
----------------
oh pilot ratio, which is crucial given each sortie has tremendous stress on pilot

Furthermore, the IAF’s current fighter aircraft to pilot ratio is 1:0.81.”Our sanctioned strength for [combat] pilots is less than that of our adversaries,” the report said, adding that the Pakistan Air Force’s fighter to pilot ratio was 1:2.5, IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly reported. In the U.S. the cockpit to pilot ratio is 1:2. Jane’s further summarized
https://thediplomat.com/2015/04/the-indian-air-forces-big-problem-not-enough-pilots/
---------------------

Not everything is as it seems in media reports. As of today, the IAF is only short of 300 pilots.