Military & Aerospace

Is the IAF Equipped for a Two-Front War?
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Vol. 29.2 Apr-Jun 2014 | Date : 09 Jan , 2016

F-22 Fighter Raptor

Ongoing development of long range Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), including the BZK-005, and Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAV) will provide capability to conduct long-range reconnaissance and strike operations. In the area of air defence capabilities, the PLAAF is focussing on long range systems designed against aircraft and cruise missiles. Currently, it holds the Russian S 400 Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) system (400 km range) and is indigenously working on the domestic HQ-9 SAM (200 km plus range).

At the beginning of 2000, the PLAAF had more than 3,500 combat aircraft…

Thus, the PLAAF would be a large force containing technologically advanced aircraft and equipment and with a formidable offensive and defensive capability. The overall PLAAF threat needs to be seen in the context of gradual militarisation of Tibet and the building of infrastructure there. The rail head at Lhasa, connecting it to Xining (the capital of Qinghai province) over a distance of 1,956km is of immense strategic importance and a major threat to Indian defence. There are now 14 airfields in Tibet which can support operations in the Himalayan region. Their significance to any PLAAF operations against India is self-evident. Air-to-air refuelling capabilities have added further potency to PLAAF capabilities. Needless to say, hostilities with just China alone would be a major challenge for the IAF and when supplemented by a simultaneous Pakistani aggressive action, the resultant two-front war could be a major test of the IAF’s confidence in itself as a professional force.

IAF Readiness

So how does the IAF stand in comparison? During the 1960s, the IAF was authorised to build up to a 64 squadron force, including ten transport squadrons and a heavy bomber squadron. Subsequently, the figure was pruned down to 45 squadrons. However, it actually was able to build up to just 39.5 squadrons and is currently at a 34 squadron level. The gradual descent to this number has been an agonising tribulation for the IAF with the MiG-21 valiantly continuing to fight on beyond its constructive years. Indigenous production of the Indian Light Combat Aircraft Tejas has already taken more than three decades and is perhaps still a few years shy of operationalisation in the IAF. Even when it does get its operational clearance, it is unlikely to be greeted by the IAF with amiable cordiality. The Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) deal is taking its own time and incredibly, could not be signed during the FY 2013-2014 as funds ran out. The current strength of combat aircraft is around 650. The IAF fervently awaits the signing of the 126 aircraft MMRCA deal.

H-6 Bomber

Hoping to overcome almost a decade of neglect, the IAF aims to achieve an effective strength of 42 squadrons by 2022. This is expected to be done with the ongoing induction of 272 Su-30s, future plans for induction of 126 MMRCA Rafale as soon as the deal can be signed and the Tejas LCA whenever the Indian defence industry can get its act together and the T-50, the fifth generation fighter being jointly developed by Indian and Russia. Twelve C-130J Super Hercules and ten C-17 Globemasters are expected to provide strategic airlift capability. The IAF has a fairly good integrated air defence set up and has been making all endeavours to become a strategic air force. Speaking at an IAF base recently, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, Chief of Air Staff said, “The IAF is on a trajectory of modernisation and is transforming into a strategic aerospace power with full spectrum capability.” So how well is the IAF equipped to deal with a two-front war?

The IAF’s answer to the two-front war conundrum currently appears to be the Su-30…

A Two Front War

The above appraisals of the two neighbouring air forces are not comprehensive inasmuch as they do not catalogue their total assets and aircraft exhaustively. However, it is evident that each one is a force that cannot be ignored or derided. Despite the fact that the combat strength of PAF is only about two-thirds of the IAF’s, its aircraft are not very inferior to the latter’s, and its pilots well-motivated and competent. Moreover, the territorial expanse which is to be defended and over which PAF would be required to support friendly land forces is much smaller than India’s. This factor could be seen as a disadvantage for the IAF as it would have to spread its resources thinly as compared to the PAF.

However, if the PAF and the IAF were to be compared as adversaries, the IAF still enjoys significant advantages over the PAF. It has larger numbers of high performance aircraft, operates more BVR-capable platforms; its aircraft deploy better on-board sensors and electronic warfare systems and its pilots are more proficient in advanced air combat tactics – especially operations in a BVR environment. The IAF possesses superior combat support aircraft, better infrastructure and a continually improving integrated air defence network. However, the IAF’s steadily falling numbers could become critical in the event of a large-scale or protracted war with Pakistan.

With the PLAAF, the numbers game is reversed as it has an overwhelming superiority in numbers of combat aircraft. China’s use of its military on the ground in the ‘disputed territories’ to remind India of its territorial agenda is a continual irritant. It is not difficult to envisage a scenario wherein manned and unmanned flights over Indian territory would supplement the transgressions on the ground. When that does happen, India’s political will is likely to come under trial as there appears to be no decisive rules of engagement laid down for such contingencies. The gradual militarisation of Tibet and the build up of infrastructure there is another area of concern for India. The PLAAF’s air-to-air refuelling capabilities render operational ranges threatening and menacing for India.

The Su-30 needs to be supplemented by the MMRCA at the earliest…

The IAF’s answer to the two-front war conundrum currently appears to be the Su-30, a truly air dominance fighter permitting multiple offensive missions due to its speed, firepower, manoeuvrability and extended range. The Su-30 gave a good account of itself in Exercise Live Wire last year; one of the major aims of the exercise was practicing the IAF’s capability for a two-front war. As part of the exercise, Su-30s flew 1,800-km long missions taking off from an airfield in Assam in the East and flying to the Western front with air-to-air refuelling en route. With such extended ranges possible, the IAF has the choice to build or develop air bases all around the country (as opposed to the earlier ones close to the border with Pakistan). Thus, we now have Su-30s located at Thanjavur (South), Chhabua (North East) and Pune (West). There is the issue of numbers though; the planned strength of 272 will still be far short of the number of aircraft with similar capabilities that China can deploy.

Another worrying factor is the poor serviceability of the Su-30 fleet in recent months. With 12 hard points for armament, the Su-30 can also carry the air launched BrahMos cruise missile which may be expected to be used against strategic targets such as dams, power stations and industrial clusters. The Indian Strategic Forces Command (SFC) has also asked for 40 nuclear capable strike aircraft for the IAF (their command and control is not in the public domain yet). In all probability, this task will devolve upon the Su-30 fleet. Clearly, these two roles of the Su-30 render it the keystone of the two-front war. However, by itself, the Su-30 may not be an adequate deterrent or war winner in a two-front war scenario.

Conclusion

As can be seen, the PLAAF would be a formidable opponent while the PAF, although on a lesser level, would still be a tough antagonist. The probability of complicity between China and Pakistan is very high. There is also the possibility that Pakistan jumps in just to exploit a situation arising out of hostilities between China and India. After all, Pakistan has still not stopped thinking and talking about the 1971 War. Should the two engage India militarily at the same time, the IAF would indeed be inadequate to the roles and tasks assigned to it.

Political and bureaucratic obstructionism is the ‘third front’ that the defence forces have been constantly fighting against…

The Su-30, discussed earlier, needs to be supplemented by the MMRCA at the earliest. Even if the inordinately delayed deal was to be signed today, it is only the first 18 aircraft that come off the manufacturer’s assembly line. The rest will have to be assembled in India in a facility yet to be set up. The first Indian aircraft may take a year to emerge and the total figure of 126 may take three to five years. The Tejas, despite the hype raised about its Initial Operational Clearance in December, is still far from operationalisation. In any case, it cannot compare with the Su-30 or the MMRCA or with the frontline Chinese aircraft pitted against the IAF.

The apathy of the Ministry of Defence and indeed, the government, towards the needs of the defence services to be equipped and prepared to meet the mandate given to them is a cause of concern today. Tomorrow, it could lead to humiliation at the hands of our neighbours. This political and bureaucratic obstructionism is the ‘third front’ that the defence forces have been constantly fighting against during the last decade and more; if the IAF fails to touch the sky with glory in a possible two-front war, military historians would undoubtedly ascribe its ignominy to this third front.

1 2
Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Gp Capt AK Sachdev

Director - Operations, EIH Ltd.

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left

14 thoughts on “Is the IAF Equipped for a Two-Front War?

  1. Scrambling for a two-front war today’s Generation 4 and 4+ aircraft have long legs The Su-30s, MiG-29s India needs 4+4 Generation Aircrafts. They need Rafal to back the SU30 and mig 29. We have only 2 Tejas. The Jaguar needs upgrading to a 4+4 gen Aircraft.. The Mirage-2000s are versatile fighters that not only undertake strike and bombing missions, jaguar need upgrading the Indian Bison mig 21 100 Ac and ,mig 27 100 Ac needs replacing. I would feel more confident that the IAF would be able to face a two front war. The Chinese Air force would have to face a very modern Indian Air force. The Pakistani Air force could be destroyed on the Ground.
    Prem

  2. Sorry, but your presentation in this paper is not inspiring, dear Group Captain.

    You have all the facts of PAF and PLAAF in glowing details. You do not seem to have confidence in yourself or IAF. I hate to believe that IAF is a pussy cat.

    Think again, unless you believe that IAF is about to lie down and play dead.

    If you are making the politicians to sweat with your write up, then you are barking at the wrong door.

  3. Gp Capt AK Sachdev Director – Operations, EIH Ltd. We should research some more on this. Why these people dont want make in india to grow. IAF has hardly fought any battles in recent times and i dont expect it to happen soon. I dont know why the writer is in favour of import lobby. The answer is hidden in his current profile.

  4. India you are unable to face the truth about your neighbours, Pakistan knows it can not inflect any serious damage on India but India can do very serious damage on Pakistan.
    In the 1962 when India suffered a serious defeat by the Chinese India should have always been strengthening it armed forces to face china.
    I don’t live in India but that those doses not mean to say that I lack the knowledge about the other country armed forces. Indian Army 1.3 million, Chinese Army 2, 7 million, Pakistan army 0.6 million = 3 million. Which India faces? Pakistan can not fight India alone but on the eastern front there is a big monster even the US will not want fight alone China, If India think they can take on Pakistan and China will they are fools.
    IAF front line strength not much more then 700 Aircrafts, the Indian navy I should forget they are a liability to them self’s.
    India you need the flowing to strengthen the Army which 200000 personal which a lot and cost lot off money. The IAF need 150 new Aircrafts, India Navy needs to retrain all it ranking and 10 submarines with AIP, then Indian can stand strong. It all about money cut the corruption then you can get 100000 man into the Army within 1o years, it about what the armed forces can do today.
    prem

  5. Your conclusion appears to be lobbying for Rafale as you talk of assembling the rest of the aircraft in India.

    India must stop selling itself by just happy assembling. It has to bloody well start making them in our factories for self reliance.

    Why can’t we make them, is a question the govt needs to ask us?

  6. Dear Sir,

    Indian Govt. always looks at Pakistan in the military strengths and forgets China. With a meager 660+ fighters aircraft how will IAF defend a 3500+ fighters of China and if collaborated with PAF as it is known they are buddies now.

    Indian military strength must be at least 1.5 time that of China in all aspects (not just the Air force). The future of this world only depends on Economic power, which has to be equally supported by military power.

    Resources to be mobilized by us in India; must support the industrial development and the military development, simultaneously.

    We can’t procrastinate these matters and say by 2022 or so we will match with China. That is too late. We all must sacrifice our expenses to boost this noble cause and we can see India will be far ahead of other nations just within in 3 to 5 years.

    Regards

    MOHAN JANGA
    Ex. IAF

  7. Very precious article and fully analysed. Now its time government should be aware about it and should take good decision and should provide enough budget for Indian Air Force. May be 100 % foreign direct investment give better improvement in defence.

  8. A very well analysed article. The two front war scenario is real and it is time the Government took note of it and worked out an encompassing strategy to enable the defence services to be prepared to meet the threat. No time should be lost in appointing a CDS and to spell out its threat perception and expectations from the defence services in the form of Defence Strategy. It is only then can the defence services prepare themselves in terms of their demands for equipment, a combined and a coordinated offensive and defensive strategy, training, logistics and other operational related needs.

  9. Well there are a couple of issues that have to be considered when we talk of a two front confrontation. Firstly how does the Air Force consider it will manage a two front confrontation? We barely managed to hold off the PAF in 1965 and in 1971. Secondly we are down to 34 Squadrons and what is the operational serviceability of these Squadrons? How many sorties will they be able to handle in a day? Is that capability to the maximum level today? I guess not. Unlike the previous wars where the Army was shy of asking for ground support; this time around things will be different and the demand for ground support sorties will be enormous. What proportion of the aircraft will be available for Ground Support Operations? Why is the Air force satisfied with having 42 Squadrons when we face adversaries on two fronts? Don’t you think that we need at least 60 Combat squadrons out of which at least 40% will be required for Ground Support and other interdiction tasks? Mayanmarese air space will be violated in case of a conflict with China, and they are sure to use their Air Bases in Sichuan and Chengdu to launch operations against us in the East. What have we done to cover that area in terms of Ground Based Air Defences? In actual fact we have a lot of ground to cover before we can say we will be able to handle a two front confrontation. The IAF in its current state is incapable of handling a two front confrontation. If the PAF is buying antiquated F-16s I am sure they will perform better than the MIG-21s we have in our inventory. So the situation with the Air Force is not a happy one.

  10. Dear Gp Capt has got a lot of things wrong. PAF “wishes” it had 250 JF 17. It doesn’t have the money for it. J10 induction into PAF is indefinitely delayed. The F16 they are trying to obtain from other countries are obsolete second or third hand A/B versions just to create an illusion that they have more F16’s. JF17 are at present are technically third generation aircraft with some 4th generation avionics. Block 2 JSF that will come out by 2016 may be considered to have 4th generation capabilities. Wikileaks showed how surprised the US was and consider pakistan took a retrograde step buying JF17’s. JF17 will never have any sort of 4.5 or 5th generation capabilities in its lifetime because the aircraft isn’t designed to be that and it would cost a lot of money to upgrade it to that level. And money is something Pakistan does not have.
    PLAAF will not have a true 5th generation aircraft till the middle of next decade atleast. The ones they have are prototypes. They do not have the engines the avionics and basically the capability to field a true 5th generation plane. Reverse engineering and espionage can only get you so much. Please dont be fooled by flying shells that look like copies of american stealth aircrafts. PLAAF has the numbers but majority of their fighters are obsolete. They have only started to induct 4th generation aircrafts. Their sukhoi variants are inferior to ours. The J10’s and J11’s are touted as 4.5 generation fighters but those claims cannot be verified. Both are still undergoing testing and evaluation. PLAAF is also untested in aerial combat and their training is suspect. India can still holds the edge in an aerial duel with PLAAF and would remain so atleast till the end of this decade.
    Winning a two front war would depend on how well the three services, the army, the navy and the airforce coordinate and maximise our potential.

  11. It is not clear to me how effective the airfields in Tibet will be for PLAAF due to rarefied atmosphere on such heights, i.e. very low atmospheric pressure. I guess, China could not operate heavy fighter-interceptors from high up in the mountain, whereas IAF could operate heavy aircrafts from their bases at the bottom of the Himalayas. Could Gp Capt Sachdev please comment?

  12. Capt. sahb do you know that western people use KILL SWITCH/HARDWARE TROJAN HORSE in imported weapons.And when there will be war of western countries with India then none of imported weapons will work against them.For the example RADAR that Syria has bought/imported didn’t work for one hours when Israel Air Force attacked Syria.Country that has sold RADAR to Syria, sold kill switch code to Israel.So pls make the GOI and Army aware of this.

More Comments Loader Loading Comments