IAF had Superior airpower compared to china in 1962

[Ticker]

Let me give you guys some clues..... politics, special interest groups, incompletancy, mere excuses, jealousy, poor social behaviour, readers' interests, lack of confidence, illiteracy, ignorance, dumb, hopelessness, desperateness etc.

No tin horn, this is real-politik.

 

[Ticker]

I hope Wanglaokan can reply to this statement. He knows that stronger borders and more communication will remove doubts and avoid any unfortunate event to occur because of small mistake. He will agree with me that India and China are trying to become closer allies.

And don't go personal for your own sake. You are right about friends don't do that, they just use drones.

What will you do, rally the Indians to report against me so that I get banned - OOs. I am not going to bow down to tinker heads like you.

Avoiding untoward incidents is resorted to between enemies as well. It is a matter of interests. China does not want war despite Indian provocations. However, the relations between two countries are not dependent on avoidance of untoward border incidents, these are based on their broader national interests. And India is displaying her broader interests by aligning with China's unfriendly neigbours in SE Asia. If India had any respect for china's sovereignty, she would not have contracted Vietnam for those blocks in disputed sea zone to explore for oil. India would not be interested in joining a military alliance between Japan, Australia and America. And India would not resort to hedging in those countries who acrimoniously align with America in order to contain China.

And you think that everybody else is a fool and you are the only intelligent breed around.

 

[humanfirst]

If people look closely, they would certainly come to know that you are brain dead while making such a statement which is full of assumptions; China, Russia and India are becoming friends. Can't even say that you joke, you don't even have the aesthetic composure to do that.

Not long ago the Indian PM Vajpayee in a letter to world leaders stated that China is the reason behind India's nuclear tests. Not long ago India's defence ministers have repeated again and again that China is India's number one enemy. Not long ago India announced raising two additional mountain divisions against China. India is in a process to raise 2-3 strike coprs, an artillery division, 1-2 armoured divisions and an assortment of other defence related infrastructure is being upgraded - all against China. Friends don't do that.

Don't try and become a lowly paid rotten replica of Indian MEA on PDF.

Indian polititians portray china as a theat only to justify our military budget...Even that has stopped now.And about our mountain divisions etc etc i have seen you youself saying that 80% of our army and airforce bases are dircted against Pakistan and only 20% against china.

India's Force Deployment

Indian Army

Against Pakistan - 10 Corps

Against China - 3 Corps


Indian Air Force

Against Pakistan - 29 Air Bases

Against China - 6 Air Bases


Indian Navy

Against Pakistan - 10 Naval Bases/Ports

Eastern Naval Command - 3 Naval Bases

You can calculate the percentages yourself.

.Will that be possible if china is our number one enemy?


Now coming to the postitive things:
India-China trade is nearing the $100 billion mark..A lot of Chinese companies are investing india and largest chinese tech firms like Huawei and Zte have their biggest R&D centres out of china in india..It is evident to any sane person that we have to gain more from cooperation than from enemity..Yes we are both cautious of each other but we have definitely reached a stage where we can cooperate in common interests.

 

[KRAIT]

What will you do, rally the Indians to report against me so that I get banned - OOs. I am not going to bow down to tinker heads like you.

Avoiding untoward incidents is resorted to between enemies as well. It is a matter of interests. China does not want war despite Indian provocations. However, the relations between two countries are not dependent on avoidance of untoward border incidents, these are based on their broader national interests. And India is displaying her broader interests by aligning with China's unfriendly neigbours in SE Asia. If India had any respect for china's sovereignty, she would not have contracted Vietnam for those blocks in disputed sea zone to explore for oil. India would not be interested in joining a military alliance between Japan, Australia and America. And India would not resort to hedging in those countries who acrimoniously align with America in order to contain China.

And you think that everybody else is a fool and you are the only intelligent breed around.

I don't have to say anything to Indians against you. They all know about you and your mindset, when you get emotional, you use these types of words. Shows your maturity.

As for India aligning with Unfriendly nations of China in SE, all these nations already have trade relations with China and believe me China trades with Vietnam as it trades with you.

India is increasing its ties with SE nations to increase its sphere of influence and there is nothing wrong in it. If you guys can give land in disputed land in GB to China, why can't we work with Vietnam for commercial purpose like exploration of oil.

As for Japan is considered, look at China and Japan, they are having a tussle yet they are moving to do trade in Yuan. Both are intelligent nations who keep business and emotions separated. May be you should learn form China.

Australia is important for India because of IN doctrine to get along with powers in Pacific and not to forget Uranium deal with them.

India already showed sign that it won't become part of US plan to contain China and that has always caused mixed emotions in US Congress when India is discussed. India has its independent foreign policy. We don't get push over by them to get into war that wasn't our. Iran is the perfect example of our independent stance and our approach to own interests.

Every nation looks out for its national interest so we are doing just that. Whatever the differences we have with China, we don't want to get into any kind of unfriendly situation as both nations are more focused on their own development.

So don't think yourself as master mind of geo-politics and call me low paid rotten replica of Indian MEA. If you have problem with my statement argue in limits.

Grow up kiddo. Learn from your all weather friend, how to develop and keep emotions in check and avoiding its effects on business.

 

[Kinetic]

IAF had much superior fire power than China in 1962 aw well as Navy thanks to European weapon systems in our hands. But They have never being used during the conflict. IA was taken by surprise and overwhelmed by number. India was not expecting an attack.

 

[fatman17]

In what appears to be a quasi-official response, the nationalist Chinese daily, Global Times, reacted predictably to recent remarks made by Air Chief Marshal N.A.K. Browne about the employment of air power in the 1962 war. However, certain facts need to be contested as they convey the wrong image of the Indian Air Force (IAF) of those times.

Contrary to what the report says, the IAF in 1962 did not merely consist of “British WWII Spitfire turbo propeller aircraft” and “second-hand” Vampire aircraft. It also had around 300 Mystere, Hunter and Gnat jets that were far superior to the MiGs —15,17 and 19 — that China had. In an excellent article written for Strategic Analysis, entitled “The 1962 India-China War and Kargil 1999: Restrictions on the use of Air Power”, R. Sukumaran, a distinguished fighter pilot in the IAF and a researcher with the Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis at the time, argued that the absence of a broader understanding of air power within the politico-military intelligence establishment in India, and not a capability gap, resulted in the decision not to use air power.

The Global Times incorrectly assumes that the Vampire was the main Indian fighter aircraft of those days and goes on to highlight that Vampire aircraft had been trounced by Chinese volunteers as early as the Korean War. The report ignores the absence of any corresponding People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) capability for close air support missions to support the Chinese advance in both Ladakh and the NEFA sectors.

As for the IAF re-supply drops to forward troops being sub-optimal, it must be understood that just as the use of offensive air power in Kargil at altitudes in excess of 13,000 feet was a historical first for the IAF, re-supply drops at 14,000 feet and above had only been attempted by the IAF since November 1961, in support of the Forward Policy. In fact, Air Marshal C.K.S. Raje (retd) set a world record for the highest landing and take-off at Daulat Beg Oldi Advance Landing Ground on July 23, 1962, in a CH-47 Packet transport aircraft, which was the mainstay of IAF transport operations in the 1962 war. The feat also highlighted the competence and commitment of the IAF to support the Indian army in making up for the lack of a logistics lifeline in Ladakh and the NEFA.

IAF Dakotas, Packets, Otters and the recently inducted Bell G-47 helicopter carried out hundreds of sorties in support of besieged garrisons and troops. In that context, even the “40 per cent” success rate mentioned by the Global Times report can be considered a significant achievement, given that hardly any Chinese transport aircraft or helicopters were seen in the area, even for casualty evacuation missions.

Asher Lee, a noted historian on air power, says in the 1963 edition of Brassey’s Naval Annual that, contrary to our own intelligence reports, China had no MiG-21s; they were experiencing serious aviation fuel problems and had unsuccessfully employed air power in clashes against Taiwan in the preceding five years, using the large and lumbering IL-28 bombers. The issue of employing offensive air power, both in Ladakh and the NEFA, was extensively discussed and while the high-altitude jungle terrain of the Northeast is said to have been an operational impediment, no such apprehension was expressed about Ladakh.

In the final analysis, an all-round lack of understanding of the capabilities of air power, and a perceived fear of escalation, should it be employed, led to it not being exploited. After the Kargil experience, which did not lead to any escalation when India employed offensive air power, significant progress in air-land synergies has been made in India. This will ensure that 1962 is never repeated as far as the use of air power in high-altitude terrains is concerned.


The writer is a serving Air Vice Marshal of the Indian Air Force. Views are personal


IAF had Superior airpower compared to china in 1962 | idrw.org

whats the use of such superior power if it was not put to proper effect!?

 

[KRAIT]

whats the use of such superior power if it was not put to proper effect!?

Nehru didn't took recommendations of Indian armed chiefs which cost us a lot. This is the story.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

I don't have to say anything to Indians against you. They all know about you and your mindset, when you get emotional, you use these types of words. Shows your maturity.

As for India aligning with Unfriendly nations of China in SE, all these nations already have trade relations with China and believe me China trades with Vietnam as it trades with you.

India is increasing its ties with SE nations to increase its sphere of influence and there is nothing wrong in it. If you guys can give land in disputed land in GB to China, why can't we work with Vietnam for commercial purpose like exploration of oil.

As for Japan is considered, look at China and Japan, they are having a tussle yet they are moving to do trade in Yuan. Both are intelligent nations who keep business and emotions separated. May be you should learn form China.

Australia is important for India because of IN doctrine to get along with powers in Pacific and not to forget Uranium deal with them.

India already showed sign that it won't become part of US plan to contain China and that has always caused mixed emotions in US Congress when India is discussed. India has its independent foreign policy. We don't get push over by them to get into war that wasn't our. Iran is the perfect example of our independent stance and our approach to own interests.

Every nation looks out for its national interest so we are doing just that. Whatever the differences we have with China, we don't want to get into any kind of unfriendly situation as both nations are more focused on their own development.

So don't think yourself as master mind of geo-politics and call me low paid rotten replica of Indian MEA. If you have problem with my statement argue in limits.

Grow up kiddo. Learn from your all weather friend, how to develop and keep emotions in check and avoiding its effects on business.

Jeez. I really cannot believe that you are attempting to educate this poster. Clearly his/her mindset is that India and China are number 1 enemies. It makes him/her sleep easier at night in the steadfast belief that if India has to invade Pakistan then some 1 million PLA personnal will storm into India to defend Pakistan. His/her political knowledge is limited to "Cow worshipping evil Bharityas are weak and retarded and need to be beaten to a pulp." Let him/her and Ajtr live in their delusional bubble for heavens sake.

 

[arp2041]

It's really interesting that whenever a thread is opened here, apart from discussing the technicalities of the issue everyone just jumps on with his or her own views & in no time the discussion is on completely different topic than what the thread was about. The Thread is about the result "IF" there would have been an air combat in 1962 between IAF & PLAAF, we should better compare the two air forces, there powers, there weaknesses, rather than deviating onto Kashmir, to 1971 to 1965 to anything else. Here are some interesting points:

1. IAF had some 600 fighters at the time of 1962 comprising of Vampires, Gnat, Hunters,etc. & PLAAF had some 1500 fighters comprising mig-15, mig-17 & mig-19s.

2. The Hunter and the Gnat were among the most modern subsonic aircraft at the time. Of the Chinese aircraft, only the MiG-19 was comparable in performance.

3. Most IAF a/c were based in western sector but if ordered could had easily supported the eastern sector, also 6 squadrons were based in the eastern sector apart from this many WW2 airstrips were available to support any IAF missions.

4. But PLAAF had only 6 airfields in Tibet, while it's mainland airfields were too far from Indian border & without air to air refuellers, they were of no use.

5. In a 1963 British assessment of PLAAF, Wg. Cdr. Asher Lee (a British air power analyst) noted that China had no MiG-21 aircraft (Indian establishment was afraid that Chinese posses these latest jets of that time) in 1962, also he credits the lack of the Chinese air effort in the 1962 war and in clashes with Taiwan in the previous five years, to a serious aviation fuel problem. Both of these points were unknown to the Indian intelligence agencies making it a monumental failure on there part.

For further read:

http://www.idsa.in/system/files/strategicanalysis_sukumaran_0903.pdf

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Nehru didn't took recommendations of Indian armed chiefs which cost us a lot. This is the story.

True indeed. One only has to examine the relationship between Nehru and the Indian military to understand why. Whilst Nehru's distrust of a military system which was more or less still British accustomed resulted in the current day army answers to government status in India, it did result in the military being more or less ineffective during his leadership

 

[humanfirst]

. And India is displaying her broader interests by aligning with China's unfriendly neigbours in SE Asia. If India had any respect for china's sovereignty, she would not have contracted Vietnam for those blocks in disputed sea zone to explore for oil. India would not be interested in joining a military alliance between Japan, Australia and America. And India would not resort to hedging in those countries who acrimoniously align with America in order to contain China.

There are some things you should know
1.We are a stictly non aligned nation and does not form alliances against any nation,but being a sovereign nation,we will deal with nations where our interests are served.Just like China is involved in defence deals with pakistan
2.Our oil exploration is way far from areas disputed between China and Vietnam
3.You are so dumb to think that India will form any military alliance with Japan,US and America..We may trade with them and even buy weapons from them..But no alliances,against anyone..We are just watching how being a major non nato ally is faring for pakistan..

 

[Omega007]

IAF had much superior fire power than China in 1962 aw well as Navy thanks to European weapon systems in our hands. But They have never being used during the conflict. IA was taken by surprise and overwhelmed by number. India was not expecting an attack.

Hell yeah.But it's not always about nos or uality of fighters you have,but terrain,weather,availability of air bases etc is also very much important in order to mount an air campaigne.The average height of TAR is about 16000 feet,the air is thin and that's why fighters can't take off with full payload and fuel.On the other hand,IAF air bases are located on much lower heights.

Back in 1962,it is true that PLAAF had 2000 good quality fighters as many members has stated.But what they failed to understand that back then PLAAF didn't have a network of air bases necessary to mount an effective air campaign against Indian positions.And their fighters didn't have that kind of range to reach on battle ground from Chengdu or Langhou military regions.So if IAF was used,they would have been in a serious disadvantage.

Even today,PLAAF doesn't have any extensive air bases in TAR due to the problems I ststed above.And that's the reason PLAGF has invested so heavily on conventionally armed LACMs,MRBMs and NLOS BSMs.

 

[arbit]

Nehru made a lot of stupid decisions at that time. If not using IAF was one of those, we probably will never know. But if browne is saying what he just said, with his professional knowledge about strengths of respective air forces of India and china. I find no reason not to believe him.

and a Shakespearean wannabe dude (Ticker) here once said, ' main in sabke liye akela hi kaafi hai' or something along those lines.
i was hoping he meant on the frontline, running towards the border with a pen and paper in hand and we merrily waiting for him.

Turns out he was talking about an online forum. you can't imagine my disappointment. Since then he has gone Shakespearean in his outta context vocabulary and resorted to personal insults !! Real nice.

 

[Ticker]

I don't have to say anything to Indians against you. They all know about you and your mindset, when you get emotional, you use these types of words. Shows your maturity.

As for India aligning with Unfriendly nations of China in SE, all these nations already have trade relations with China and believe me China trades with Vietnam as it trades with you.

India is increasing its ties with SE nations to increase its sphere of influence and there is nothing wrong in it. If you guys can give land in disputed land in GB to China, why can't we work with Vietnam for commercial purpose like exploration of oil.

As for Japan is considered, look at China and Japan, they are having a tussle yet they are moving to do trade in Yuan. Both are intelligent nations who keep business and emotions separated. May be you should learn form China.

Australia is important for India because of IN doctrine to get along with powers in Pacific and not to forget Uranium deal with them.

India already showed sign that it won't become part of US plan to contain China and that has always caused mixed emotions in US Congress when India is discussed. India has its independent foreign policy. We don't get push over by them to get into war that wasn't our. Iran is the perfect example of our independent stance and our approach to own interests.

Every nation looks out for its national interest so we are doing just that. Whatever the differences we have with China, we don't want to get into any kind of unfriendly situation as both nations are more focused on their own development.

So don't think yourself as master mind of geo-politics and call me low paid rotten replica of Indian MEA. If you have problem with my statement argue in limits.

Grow up kiddo. Learn from your all weather friend, how to develop and keep emotions in check and avoiding its effects on business.

I don't know who to believe. Responsible Indian leaders who have publicly declared China as India's number one enemy or some nondescript tin horns here who are stating that China is India's friend number one. I wonder if it is a common Indian cliche of being kuli number one or biwi number one or similar aspects more pronounced as bollywood diplomacy.

It was China which approached India to enhance and better the bilateral relationship, and look what India does - raise additional strike corps and armoured divisions to attack China. Undermine Chinese sovereign sea zone by aligning with American led containment efforts against China. Resort to duplicity at international level in order to present a friendly face while at the same time attempting to undercut the same friend with which enhancement of trade is being cited as enhancement of friendship.

The whole world knows how duplicitous India is both at bi-lateral and multi-lateral fora. Libya, Syria, Iran, China, Afghanistan and examples of many other countries are a testimony to India's double-dealing.

Hey tin horn, you are presenting yourself as a low paid rotten replica of MEA as you mentioned yourself in your post. I am just stating facts.

 

[Wickerman]

Not long ago the Indian PM Vajpayee in a letter to world leaders stated that China is the reason behind India's nuclear tests. Not long ago India's defence ministers have repeated again and again that China is India's number one enemy. Not long ago India announced raising two additional mountain divisions against China. India is in a process to raise 2-3 strike coprs, an artillery division, 1-2 armoured divisions and an assortment of other defence related infrastructure is being upgraded - all against China. Friends don't do that.

You need to really examine your head. You keep parroting this nonsense over and over again on PDF. Yes, we have to counter the Chinese military buildup in order to MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO. Otherwise the rate at which China modernizes, we will be left far far behind. And we already are behind, so all we are doing is catching up, so that the balance doesnt adversely tip in China's favor (although the balance is still in China's favor even now).

This however does not mean India is going to go to war with China, and we are all paranoic. This is Pakistani mentality. Forever belligerent. India is not a belligerent nation. We only build weapons or acquire them for deterrence.

However, the relations between two countries are not dependent on avoidance of untoward border incidents, these are based on their broader national interests. And India is displaying her broader interests by aligning with China's unfriendly neigbours in SE Asia. If India had any respect for china's sovereignty, she would not have contracted Vietnam for those blocks in disputed sea zone to explore for oil. India would not be interested in joining a military alliance between Japan, Australia and America. And India would not resort to hedging in those countries who acrimoniously align with America in order to contain China.

You display zero intelligence, foresight or understanding about India's "alignments". India does not "align" with anybody. India is a non-aligned nation. Yes we build weapons to avoid any untoward border incidents. And yes we act based on our broader national interests and it is indeed in our interests and it is indeed in China's interests that we work together and cooperate. You can rant as much as you want on PDF, it wont change reality or the Chinese-Indian cooperation.

As for India's cooperation with SE Asian nations, we will. Because we believe in bilateral relations. We are non aligned and we work with all countries. That is why India can work with Palestine as well as Isreal. That is why India can work with China as well as Japan, Korea and Vietnam. There will always be competition, but this does not make China an "enemy". This one eyed outlook seems to be a solely Pakistani trait.

Jeez. I really cannot believe that you are attempting to educate this poster. Clearly his/her mindset is that India and China are number 1 enemies. It makes him/her sleep easier at night in the steadfast belief that if India has to invade Pakistan then some 1 million PLA personnal will storm into India to defend Pakistan. His/her political knowledge is limited to "Cow worshipping evil Bharityas are weak and retarded and need to be beaten to a pulp." Let him/her and Ajtr live in their delusional bubble for heavens sake.

Or we can just take PlanetWarriors advice

The whole world knows how duplicitous India is both at bi-lateral and multi-lateral fora. Libya, Syria, Iran, China, Afghanistan and examples of many other countries are a testimony to India's double-dealing.

You are totally right here. We WILL double deal. Thats India's policy!!! Its India's policy of non-alignment. We dont give a crap about what a country feels about another country. NOT OUR PROBLEM. We only care about our friendship with THAT particular country at any given time. So we will have good relations with Iran, and at the same time maintain good relations with Israel, and at the same time maintain good relations with Palestine, and at the same time maintain good relations with china, and at the same time maintain good relations with Japan!! and so on and so forth!

In the meantime we will also build up our forces, as a DETERRENT. So any country looking at India will be friendly to us, but wont think of attacking us because we have built up a good army/military base! We also wont interfere with affairs of other countries by sending troops in etc.,

This non-alignment is something you dont understand, because Pakistan has always sided with someone or the other. So you are looking at it only from this mindset where you put countries into 2 baskets. Enemies and Friends. We only have one basket and put everyone in it. We will even be ready to cultivate good relationship with Pakistan and through diplomacy get Pakistan to relinquish its claim to Kashmir. However, it is Pakistan that wont allow that to happen. Therefore a lone, separate basket for you, you basketcase!