'Pakistan at disadvantage to maintain military balance'

[Abs]

i know i know well so what are you trying to say...dont the peopel in colarado need more money than their arms research needs??pakistan spends more money in percentage because it has to be ready to face a potential threat of an attack..don't they have the right to defend themselves..thats what i am saying if both can solve their differences their defense expenditure can be spend on their masses onmuch need health education,free jusicary and shelter..thats all i meant...have a nice day:army:

even if pakistan and india solve their problems it wont stop military expenditure. pakistan is spending money to have minimal deterence against india. india's got its own problem in the north, china who has a masisve millitary and therefore india needs to have a minimal deterence against them. though i agree with you that both countries should spend money in other areas to improve the lives of civilians.

 

[Keysersoze]

Sigotaka

Pakistan capabilities is not increasing at the same rate, India is surging ahead. 22% increase in budget started from the last year on, and not quite enough time to analyze the outputs. I would agree with you on your example of Al-khalid, But that is just one of the spectrums, T-90's will outnumber them anyways. Airforce, Navy(ominious) are already ahead, Army maybe only a little ahead of PA.

I am not here for Chest Thumping, Its high time Pakistan came up with a credible Naval defence

Okay this is the point I am trying to make. The idea that India is surging ahead would be true if they were spending the amount whilst pak was under embargo during the 90's. However a lot of the spending (navy withstanding) is to replace systems that are nearing the end of their lifespan. For example the MRCA deal is to replace the aircraft shortfall that was mentioned in the article I posted earlier. Also the delays in the Tejas system required more aircraft to be purchased. The T-90's are to counter any possible threat from the T-80's and also to cover the shortfall created by the constant delays to the Arjun program (plus any issues the army had with it.)as well as the obsolescence of some of their fleet Also the problems with the various other programs have required "fixing" through the purchase of foreign systems.

Yes you will be getting a increase in capability with the equipment that you are getting. But then so is Pak with the equipment they are receiving.

Finally .........my posts in this regard was not meant as an attempt to rile any argument between Pak and Indian posters. It was aimed at the Pak posters who worry too much about what India is buying (with the mindset of "if they are buying 100 widgets why don't we buy 100 widgets too?")

 

[Keysersoze]

I think what Key's was trying to say that while Indian capabilities are increasing, so are Pakistan's at around the same rate.

1. I totally disagree with this point, Pak. T-55's are not being replaced with T-55's but rather modern Al-Khalid tanks which are of roughly comparable quality to the T-90's that India is purchasing and this applies to all acquisitions.

A lot of the tanks in the Pak fleet T-59's are actually being upgraded to the Al-zarrar level which is actually a substantial upgrade. The gun is the same as the AK and the T-series tanks. (As well as targeting systems that allow it to fire on the move). The armour has been upgraded with Applique armour as well as ERA. If you take a look at the specs it is still capable of handling armour threats in the range that are in use in south asia. If you take a look at the pics in the gallery and look at a pic of a standard T-59 you can see the difference.

If you look at the following site they list the various upgrades I have mentioned.

http://www.depo.org.pk/index.php?ci...Armoured%20Fighting Vehicles and Upgrades

 

[Contrarian]

Okay this is the point I am trying to make. The idea that India is surging ahead would be true if they were spending the amount whilst pak was under embargo during the 90's. However a lot of the spending (navy withstanding) is to replace systems that are nearing the end of their lifespan. For example the MRCA deal is to replace the aircraft shortfall that was mentioned in the article I posted earlier. Also the delays in the Tejas system required more aircraft to be purchased.

I confirmed in AI, Tejas is going to be bought in numbers arond 150, its a fab plane.

The T-90's are to counter any possible threat from the T-80's and also to cover the shortfall created by the constant delays to the Arjun program (plus any issues the army had with it.)as well as the obsolescence of some of their fleet Also the problems with the various other programs have required "fixing" through the purchase of foreign systems.

Again, Arjun is being inducted.

Yes you will be getting a increase in capability with the equipment that you are getting. But then so is Pak with the equipment they are receiving.

But the thing is, the yes Pakistan is trying to close the gap in, but the gap is increasing as Pakistan cannot match the amount of defence equipment that India buys.

Finally .........my posts in this regard was not meant as an attempt to rile any argument between Pak and Indian posters. It was aimed at the Pak posters who worry too much about what India is buying (with the mindset of "if they are buying 100 widgets why don't we buy 100 widgets too?")

Not possible.

 

[Keysersoze]

I confirmed in AI, Tejas is going to be bought in numbers arond 150, its a fab plane.


Again, Arjun is being inducted.


But the thing is, the yes Pakistan is trying to close the gap in, but the gap is increasing as Pakistan cannot match the amount of defence equipment that India buys.


Not possible.

Ok since you guys are simply not getting it let me try again......If only one side was dynamic and the other static then the situation would be as you claim. HOWEVER it is dynamic on both sides. The big ticket purchases you guys tout are meant to MAINTAIN the numerical superiority previously. If Pak was not purchasing items to maintain the status then you would be correct. A place to look would be the DSCA website. There is generally a proviso on the statement (of the stuff sold to PAK) this sale will not affect the military balance in the area. I'll get to the other things in my next post........


Frontline Volume 22 - Issue 06, Mar. 12 - 25, 2005
India's National Magazine
from the publishers of THE HINDU

DEFENCE

An ageing force

RAVI SHARMA
in Bangalore

The Indian Air Force requires some 200 more aircraft urgently to update its combat squadrons, but the progress towards a purchase deal, worth $9 billion, is made at a slow pace.



SPEAKING at Aero India 2005, Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal S.P. Tyagi said that he wished the 126 combat aircraft that India was planning to buy joined the Indian Air Force (IAF) "today". Apparently, he was referring to the inadequate number of combat squadrons, which slipped to 35 from the authorised strength of 39 and a half. And with a number of Russian-made MiGs (especially MiG-21s and MiG-23s) being retired from service after having completed their technical life, the squadron strength is expected to slip to 30 in the next two to three years. This will necessitate the addition of at least 10 combat squadrons to the IAF, which means at least 180 aircraft, and an additional 20 for war wastage and as maintenance reserves.

But with the new inductions being only the Russian-made Su-30s and a few British-made Jaguars, and with India's own Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas (which was planned as a replacement for the MiG 21s) not likely to see squadron service before 2010, it is obvious that the IAF's combat fleet phase-out rate far exceeds the rate of induction. So, unless the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Aeronautical Development Authority (ADA, which designed the LCA) and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL, which is license-producing the Su-30MKI) work with a sense of urgency, India could end up woefully short in its force levels.

Some military experts say that given the IAF's capabilities of air power and increasingly dominant role - it is no longer seen as a tactical support arm to the Army, but as a strategic partner - by 2020 it would need 50 to 55 squadrons made up of aircraft that have multi-role, strike, air defence, reconnaissance and electronic warfare tasks. But people such as former Air Chief Marshal S. Krishnaswamy think otherwise. He says that expecting 55, or even 45 squadrons, to join the force is a pipedream. It would be creditable if the IAF could fill up the squadrons that are being number-plated and retain a 39 and a half combat squadron strength. Krishnaswamy said: "Maintaining the authorised strength itself could take 15 to 18 years. The nation has to look at the costs."

So the key questions are, aircraft of what size, range and capability, and how many? Moreover, can India afford - both strategically and financially - to have highly specialised aircraft, which are purely of a strike, interception or air defence capability? For example, the Jaguars, purchased in 1978 to meet the IAF's requirement for a deep penetration strike aircraft, are only capable of a strike role and are unlikely to survive an attack by, say, F-16s. Hence they have to be escorted by an air-superiority fighter such as the MiG-29. Again, the MiG-29s with the IAF are slotted for an air defence role and do not carry any punch against ground targets. Krishnaswamy said: "The Jaguars do have a role but their concept is based on the British philosophy of the 1960s of flying low below radar - days when aircraft aerodynamic design capabilities were not as good as they are today. Today we have multi-role aircraft such as the Mirage 2000 or the F-16. They can carry almost as much weapon loads as the Jaguar and are still capable of looking after themselves."

BY SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT

The French Mirage 2000-5 Mk2.

Another view holds that the IAF's combat inventory should be narrowed down to consist of three types of aircraft: air dominance, multi-role combat and tactical combat. While the 140 Su-30MKIs to be built by HAL in a phased manner over the next 12 to 13 years will help fulfil the IAF's air dominance and long range strike capability, the void in multi-role and combat-role capabilities needs to be filled urgently. (The Su-30MKIs will join the already delivered Su-30s to form around 10 squadrons.) The IAF is looking for smaller aircraft that can be used in close air support or battlefield interdiction situations. The IAF needs 126 lightweight multi-role tactical "swing role" fighters that can switch roles during the course of a mission (most modern aircraft have a primary and a secondary role). These are meant to serve as an interim measure replacing some of the IAF's ageing, in-service MiG-21s (the IAF has operated around 16 MiG-21 squadrons, some of which have already been disbanded) and stand-in/supplement for the long-delayed LCA. In addition, the 125 MiG-21Bis aircraft will augment the combat fleet. Essentially used for air defence, they are now being upgraded (so far 100 have been refitted) to become tactical fighters and rechristened MiG-21 Bisons.

Although the proposal to buy 126 combat aircraft (the IAF had asked for 150) was cleared by the government in 2002, it took the MoD three years to send requests for information (RFI) to Russia's RSK MiG Corporation (for the MiG-29M/M2), Sweden's SAAB (for the JAS-39C Gripen) and France's Dassault (for the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2). An RFI was later sent to the United States' Lockheed Martin, producers of the F-16 Fighting Falcon.

ALTHOUGH the $9 billion deal may take some time to materialise - MoD sources say that the tender is scheduled for April 2005 and the technical evaluation of the machines will take place in late 2005 - all four contenders were present at Air Force Station Yelahanka during Aero India 2005, each highlighting the attributes of its aircraft and promising the transfer of technology and work share should India decide on its fighter. The deal would include a number of aircraft being built overseas and then flown to India, with the rest being manufactured by HAL. The contract would also include long-term maintenance, spares and technological support.

In March 2002, India had looked to France to meet its need for frontline fighter aircraft. The plan was to augment the two Mirage 2000 squadrons with the more advanced Mirage 2000-5 Mk2. The Mk2 incorporates new technologies and functions such as computing capabilities and weapon systems from Dassault's Rafale aircraft programme. Yves Robins, vice-president, international relations (defence), Dassault, said: "The Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 is ideally suited for interception and air superiority missions. It is suited for high-altitude interception at high supersonic speeds (Mach 2.2 at 55,000 ft) thanks to its aerodynamic qualities and its engine [Snecma M53-P2 which is undergoing an upgrade]."

The IAF, which first acquired the fourth-generation Mirages in 1986, has long sought the expansion of its 40-odd-strong - (two squadrons) Mirage 2000H/TH inventory. But so far it has only got a "top up" reorder of 10, which has only helped in taking care of the present strike off/maintenance wastages. Ironically, the IAF's Mirages, which have an exceptional flight safety record, suffered four mishaps in 2004. While two were attributed to human error, one occurred when the aircraft's main wheel came off as the pilot pulled in the undercarriage after takeoff. The fourth one occurred when an engine blade broke off in a trainer causing a restriction of power.

GAUTAM SINGH/AP

The Russian MiG-29 M2.

Dassault hopes that the IAF's familiarity with the Mirage will win it the contract. But the MiG Corporation too is thinking on the same lines. Alexey Fedorov, the corporation's director-general, is not worried that the aircraft is still only in the prototype stage. He said: "The MiG-29 M2 has commonalities with the [much heavier, 38-tonne] Su-30MKI. It is more advanced than the Mirage 2000. The avionics and weapons systems will be of Russian, French and Indian origin. With the F-16 too in the fray it will be a stiff competition." Currently, MiG fighters are not designed to be multi-role aircraft. But Fedorov says that the MiG-29M/M2 will make up for this. While the MiG-29M is a single-seater variant, the M2 is the twin-seats trainer version.

Although many aviation experts expressed surprise at the Indian government's decision to ask Lockheed Martin for an RFI, the company takes a different view. Loren E. Timm, deputy, F-16 customer requirements, Lockheed Martin, said: "You can't buy a more cost effective aircraft than the F-16 and we support the programme from cradle to grave. Twenty-four countries are operating them. It has a 72-to-nothing record in air kills and is a true multi-role military aircraft that is capable of day/night, all-weather, air-to-ground, air-to-air, air-to-sea, closed air support and reconnaissance capabilities. If the U.S. State Department allows us to compete in the Indian bid, we will beat the Mirage 2000. We have never lost a competitive bid to Mirage."

The surprise member of the quartet is the JAS-39C Gripen, which is the only truly multi-role aircraft among the four contenders. According to Anders Annerfalk, communications manager of Gripen International, the aircraft is a more modern machine when compared to the others. While it was developed in the late 1980s, all the others date back to the 1970s. The Gripen is powered by the Volvo Aero Corporation RM12 modular power plant, which is based on the General Electric F-404-400 engine.

The four aircraft are currently being evaluated for their operational capabilities in areas such as radars, computers, navigational attack systems, the range of the missiles that could be carried, and so on. Other considerations - the kind of technical support and technology transfer that would be given, whether there would be a buy-back arrangement, what advantage the Indian manufacturer (HAL) and the nation as a whole could derive from the deal, whether the manufacturer would be dependable (for technology as well as spares), and whether political compulsions would affect the deal - would also be factored in before a final decision is made. Moreover, the IAF already operates a variety of combat aircraft of both Western (mainly French and British) and Eastern (Russian) origin, each with its own distinct design and operating philosophy. The question is whether inducting a Gripen or an F-16 would further exasperate the situation, leading to increased infrastructural expenses and wastage of time while trying to make them compatible with the IAF's present training methodology, fleet inventory and maintenance.

Spokespersons of all the companies said that they had replied to the RFI and it was now up to the Indian government to call for request for proposals (RFP). The question is how long the MoD will take before it sets the ball rolling again. Aircraft manufacturers are aware that India took more than two decades before it finally settled for the Hawk as the IAF's Advanced Jet Trainer. Krishnaswamy said: "Yes, we have procurement procedures, but there is no point in taking 15 years to buy/order aircraft which have a 10-year production cycle. In my estimate, only if we quickly procure the 126 aircraft and the LCAs roll off the production line can we hope to maintain our authorised squadron strength." Even assuming a finalisation of the order for multi-role aircraft in the next two to three years, the new fighters are not likely to be part of the IAF's inventory before 2010.

 

[Keysersoze]

Ok here is part of what was written in a previous post (from a Indian article)

"The Indian Army is already facing serious shortage of tanks with fifty per cent of its 3500 tanks slated to go to the junkyard in another five years due to old age. Last year the Indian Army decided to junk its 800 Vijayanta tanks which were commissioned into service in 1966"

Now if we calculate the number of tanks being inducted and the number being removed....... Do the 500-600 plus 124 Arjun cover this? If we believe the article then 1750 even if we lop 750 of this number then it is still short.....


If you are replacing large numbers of equipment then your budget would be equal to this. So maybe you gentlemen should remember this when touting your budget. (and lets not forget the budgetary sinkholes of the various Indigenous programs)

 

[Adux]

Ok here is part of what was written in a previous post (from a Indian article)

"The Indian Army is already facing serious shortage of tanks with fifty per cent of its 3500 tanks slated to go to the junkyard in another five years due to old age. Last year the Indian Army decided to junk its 800 Vijayanta tanks which were commissioned into service in 1966"

Now if we calculate the number of tanks being inducted and the number being removed....... Do the 500-600 plus 124 Arjun cover this? If we believe the article then 1750 even if we lop 750 of this number then it is still short.....


If you are replacing large numbers of equipment then your budget would be equal to this. So maybe you gentlemen should remember this when touting your budget. (and lets not forget the budgetary sinkholes of the various Indigenous programs)

lets say i agree with this, which i dont... tell me about the other side

 

[Adux]

Arty self proplled and otherwise, India is way ahead and is gunning for more Bofors or Denel.
Airforce, There isnt even one single aircraft in PAF inventory which has a true BVR capability, Hell our Mig-21's can fire BVR, not thier F-7's.
Superior information gathering technology via satallites, ISI is I agree Leaps and Bounds ahead of the stupid RAW
Other than Those P-3C and Agosta -90B, there isnt even anything worth talking about
Radar, All I have to say is the Green Pine.
Vikramaditya and Trenton will add new dimensions to the Navy.
GOI's focus is the Navy, Not the Army in my humble opinion.

 

[Bull]

Ok here is part of what was written in a previous post (from a Indian article)

"The Indian Army is already facing serious shortage of tanks with fifty per cent of its 3500 tanks slated to go to the junkyard in another five years due to old age. Last year the Indian Army decided to junk its 800 Vijayanta tanks which were commissioned into service in 1966"

Now if we calculate the number of tanks being inducted and the number being removed....... Do the 500-600 plus 124 Arjun cover this? If we believe the article then 1750 even if we lop 750 of this number then it is still short.....


If you are replacing large numbers of equipment then your budget would be equal to this. So maybe you gentlemen should remember this when touting your budget. (and lets not forget the budgetary sinkholes of the various Indigenous programs)

Have you taken into consideration the induction of upto 1000 T-90s + 124 Arjun. Wouldnt that take care of the 1750 figure quoted by the article.

But then still we are 636 short.

Keyseroze, since you have said so much about IA, can you state the break up of the PA for me/us here.

 

[Contrarian]

Keysersoze, what im trying to say is that though Pakistan is also dynamic and it too is purchasing defence equipment, India is doing so at a faster rate, and buying more technologically superior stuff, thus the gap is increasing. Its not like the old days, when Pakistan had better tech, low numbers and vice verce. Now India enjoys better tech as well as numbers, and it will only grow. Though Pakistan is also modernizing its armoury, it is doing so at a much slower rate than India. And this pace of India's is only set to increase more and more with time.

 

[Bull]

Keysersoze, what im trying to say is that though Pakistan is also dynamic and it too is purchasing defence equipment, India is doing so at a faster rate, and buying more technologically superior stuff, thus the gap is increasing. Its not like the old days, when Pakistan had better tech, low numbers and vice verce. Now India enjoys better tech as well as numbers, and it will only grow. Though Pakistan is also modernizing its armoury, it is doing so at a much slower rate than India. And this pace of India's is only set to increase more and more with time.

What better tech has India purchased vis a vis Pakistan ?

 

[Keysersoze]

Arty self proplled and otherwise, India is way ahead and is gunning for more Bofors or Denel.
Airforce, There isnt even one single aircraft in PAF inventory which has a true BVR capability, Hell our Mig-21's can fire BVR, not thier F-7's.
Superior information gathering technology via satallites, ISI is I agree Leaps and Bounds ahead of the stupid RAW
Other than Those P-3C and Agosta -90B, there isnt even anything worth talking about
Radar, All I have to say is the Green Pine.
Vikramaditya and Trenton will add new dimensions to the Navy.
GOI's focus is the Navy, Not the Army in my humble opinion.

Ok re: the Arty issue yes you are correct that the IA has a larger number of arty resources. (mostly towed, with some good Russian SPA) If you follow the old Soviet doctrine of heavy bombardment prior to the assault then the arty will be of great use. If you prefer more mobility and speed (which I believe most the Indian formations are geared toward) then the towed systems can be a bit of a liability.
Ok the mig21 and F-7 issue....I think you will find that the f-7's were capable of firing a BVR missile but that PAK simply did not have them to fire That has obviously changed via the two different sources so.........Also the replacements for the F-7's will have plenty of BVR capability.

ISI vs RAW .............no idea.....I'll take your word for it.....

I am sure there are other purchases for the navy. However you have to remember that the navy (much like the air-force) won't be able to defeat an enemy with out a strong army to get on the land. but I digress........

 

[Keysersoze]

Have you taken into consideration the induction of upto 1000 T-90s + 124 Arjun. Wouldnt that take care of the 1750 figure quoted by the article.

But then still we are 636 short.

Keyseroze, since you have said so much about IA, can you state the break up of the PA for me/us here.

Ok Bull that is a fair request so here it is.....

Ok now the thing you have to look at is the front line tanks which would include the following.
240 T-85 (Chinese type 96)
320 T-80UD
and a indeterminate number of Al khalids approx 100+
(with more being produced obviously)

There are also approx 1450 T-59/T-69 tanks...There have been several upgrade programs. which have upgraded the fire power of T-59's and T-69's to at least 105 mm guns (as in the m-60 or original m1 tank) The latest (3rd)upgrade the Al zarrar (the most important one in this context) upgrades the armour (visible differences to the overall look of the tank) with applique and ERA. It has also been "upgunned" with a 125mm smoothbore gun.

you can check this via the following site to check it's veracity.
http://www.depo.org.pk/index.php?a=profile&id=7

Now would this be able to take on a M1A2......no.......but a T-72.......yes

A good site to look at regarding the ability of T-series tanks to resist damage is the following webpage.
http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/fofanov/armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/index.html

SO Bull in answer to your question there will be approx 1000 (based on a production run of 400-500 AK's) tanks to take on the T-90's and approx 1000 (AL zarrar upgrades)for the T-72's

 

[Keysersoze]

Keysersoze, what im trying to say is that though Pakistan is also dynamic and it too is purchasing defence equipment, India is doing so at a faster rate, and buying more technologically superior stuff, thus the gap is increasing. Its not like the old days, when Pakistan had better tech, low numbers and vice verce. Now India enjoys better tech as well as numbers, and it will only grow. Though Pakistan is also modernizing its armoury, it is doing so at a much slower rate than India. And this pace of India's is only set to increase more and more with time.

Ok I have a few points to make here........India can be accused of many things but speed isn't one of them.........It could be argued that the flurry of purchases is due to the fact that there will be several shortfalls in a number of areas hence the purchase of large amounts of equipment quickly. (Specifically aircraft and tanks here.)

Hawk trainers.......K-8 trainers
T-90's.................AK's +T-80's
New IA artillery.....115 M109A5's
126 MRCA+MKI's.... F-16blk52, J-10 and JF-17
And LCA
Phalcon...........Erieye plus E2c

Now you can argue the superiority of these systems over each other. However it is still close enough to argue.
The navy is one area where India has increased it's lead..

As for the economic idea.......I would like to remind you that economies can take a downturn too.........

 

[Adux]

Ok re: the Arty issue yes you are correct that the IA has a larger number of arty resources. (mostly towed, with some good Russian SPA) If you follow the old Soviet doctrine of heavy bombardment prior to the assault then the arty will be of great use. If you prefer more mobility and speed (which I believe most the Indian formations are geared toward) then the towed systems can be a bit of a liability.
Ok the mig21 and F-7 issue....I think you will find that the f-7's were capable of firing a BVR missile but that PAK simply did not have them to fire That has obviously changed via the two different sources so.........Also the replacements for the F-7's will have plenty of BVR capability.

ISI vs RAW .............no idea.....I'll take your word for it.....

I am sure there are other purchases for the navy. However you have to remember that the navy (much like the air-force) won't be able to defeat an enemy with out a strong army to get on the land. but I digress........

you are wrong in the case of F-7's; the only Aircraft with BVR that too limited is the Mirage III with the ROSE upgrade,but they dont have the Missiles for it, India is equipped with the Kyopo Radar with R-77 and Israeli Jammers. It is a pretty well known issue. I suggest you read up on it.
India Doesnt Use 100 GUNS Soviet Policy, But in any case Most troops are in the frontline's itself, SO the Most guns doesnt become a liability as they are already there and no need of transport. The Replacements of Mig-21 in India are the LCA, and for the Mig 23/27 are the MMRCA hopefully the F-18 Super Hornet or the Mig-29. We already have a 66 Mig-29 being currently modified to SMT and 54 Mirage 2000H to be modified to the 2005-9. Su-30MKI is now at 50 numbers, with an additional 40 on Order, end of the production line to be at 230 in numbers/At the same time Pakistan is only expecting the JF-17 which is most likely under delay and the F-16. Phalcon AWACS as well as our Indegenious AEW mounted on the Embraer.THe list goes on such as Air-Air refuelers, Satellites dedicated to the Airforce