IAF's base in Tajikistan will be ready by '04
- Thread starter XEROX
- Start date
Revival_786
New Member
Yeah it was Soviet Air Force I think... because it was over Afganistan in the Soviet-Afgan war 
Getting back on topic - I thought that Tajikistan was an ally of Pakistan? Is it simply neutral to both countries?
Getting back on topic - I thought that Tajikistan was an ally of Pakistan? Is it simply neutral to both countries?
This base is nothing but a first step for INdia to show the world that it can expand and spread out its tentacles, it could be concerning for the US, as it would bring India and Russia closer!! but Pakistan has nothing to worry about from this base since its located in a brethren Country that has never show hostility(towards Pakistan) instead its been nothing but brotherly and friendly, it will never allow the puney two iAF squadrons to fly off to attack Pakistan!! thats even if other countries like China or Afghanistan would allow them to fly off towards pakistan and finally if there Jets can sustain them selves in a battle all alone, so far away from any sort of support on the west side!!
Admin: was the last line really necessary?
Admin: was the last line really necessary?
Hardly be concerning to the US. The US wouldn't care as she doesn't see India as any sort of a threat. Only China and Pak would be worried, but more China than Pak.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinks AdsH, and its borderline flame bait, I don't think I need to respond to that.
The rest of your post is just wishful thinks AdsH, and its borderline flame bait, I don't think I need to respond to that.
[/quote]
Thats quite magnanimous of you , to call Tajikstan, brotherly and friendly, when it intends to host frontline aircraft belonging to an ''arch enemy''
As for the puny bit, its absolutely OK by us if Two Sqadrons of the IAF with support of fleet refuellers and upcoming AWACS cover are considered no threat
the reason why they are hosting your two squadrons of toys is to pay off there burdening economies massive debt! ,theyre poor, they know IAF from there land could never attack PAF tagets, if IAF has so much resources then why is there talk of just two squadrons. it doesn't make any sense to me that youd have re-fuelers for two squadrons flying blind in the middle of no where thousands of miles away from PAF targets at-least two international borders away. i doubt IAF would have the resources nor would they have the capability to place AWACS at that location, even if they do have the will they would certainly need clearance from the host country that is tajkistan and they would need the aproval of the Russains who would definitely see the Awacs as a threat to there Sovernty.
Now if for sake of it!! IAF ever did place refuelrs in central russia and IAF wanted to attack PAF from the west, it would first need clearance of the tajaki's (not going to happen) and then it would need to ask for clearance from the Afghani's to fly through to pakistan. they would certainly need clearance to keep there re-fulers in air over Afghanistan, but that would mean that PAF would have the right to intrude into Afghan airspace and engage the any IAF targets there, PAf would have alot more support like AWACS and probably nearby bases and a hell of alot more airborne assets.
there's also china factor here too China would no doubt be keeping an eye on the IAF activities in the CA and if China would know of any organized Attack plan on PAF target it would certainly inform PAF of it!!! so there goes your surprise Flank !!!
Now if for sake of it!! IAF ever did place refuelrs in central russia and IAF wanted to attack PAF from the west, it would first need clearance of the tajaki's (not going to happen) and then it would need to ask for clearance from the Afghani's to fly through to pakistan. they would certainly need clearance to keep there re-fulers in air over Afghanistan, but that would mean that PAF would have the right to intrude into Afghan airspace and engage the any IAF targets there, PAf would have alot more support like AWACS and probably nearby bases and a hell of alot more airborne assets.
there's also china factor here too China would no doubt be keeping an eye on the IAF activities in the CA and if China would know of any organized Attack plan on PAF target it would certainly inform PAF of it!!! so there goes your surprise Flank !!!
adsH said:
Tajikstan is a sovereign nation, they don't need Russian imprimatur to have Indian aircraft in their territory, especially when India is considered to be Russias long term ally.
adsH said:
What?? Pakistan would have no authority to intercept Indian aircraft over Afghanistan. That would under International Law be seen as a hostile act by the Afghanis. Afghanistan has extremely close links with Tajikistan - I cannot see the Afghanis rejecting Indian requests for overflight if warned in Advance. The fact that they would be transiting from one country to another in a country that Afghanistan accepts as a "brother" makes it seem highly unlikely. Inclduing AAR is standard practice for any aircraft on ferry. It would be remiss of any airforce not to have them as part of the ferry component.
adsH said:
What AWACs? Pakistan doesn't have any ABMS as of the next few years. The Eyries are a few years out from being operational - assuming that they are purchased. As they are GCI networked - then Pakistan would need to have long range radar established in region to augment them. AFAIK they don't have any LR systems in that region.
adsH said:
Why would you assume that India would launch a strike from another country. There are obviously political reasons as to why the Tajikstanis are prepared to share airspace. If the US, France and Russia are sharing airbases in that region, I can't see why a fourth player is going to complicate it any further. I can't see China getting excited either. There are already 4 countiries sharing airspace and facilities in that region - 2 of them notionally aren't getting along well with China - and they have not complained about that either. In real terms China is unable to object anyway. It's a sovereign state issue for Tajikistan.
First of all PAF is expected to procure Some sort of AWACS, and thats not even gibberish!! its a fact.
no illusions there.
GF not intended towards you but "insas" did try to say that this was to open a west front PAK
thats the reason why i am going onn and onn about the factors that would have to be counted inn
Afghanis by allowing IAF jets to fly through 'ferry" to target PAF targets would be a foolish act they would be provoking a freindly and a powerfull neighbor nation!! (more powerfull not only in-terms of Conventional forces but also Unconventional means !). I seriously doubt Tajakis would allow IAF to attack PAF or Pak territory from there soil! and thats the end of that. give me a reason other then this fictitious Bulls form Insas and prove to me that IAF in CA has an anti pak agenda and it has the capability in-terms of resources and clearance to support a conflict with west side PAK.
the Afghanis would have no right to support a nation that is attacking its neighbor from its territory. IAF cannot expect its self to be sheilded by International laws when its is using others territory to sheild its self Wars get ugly!!
no illusions there.
GF not intended towards you but "insas" did try to say that this was to open a west front PAK
thats the reason why i am going onn and onn about the factors that would have to be counted inn
Afghanis by allowing IAF jets to fly through 'ferry" to target PAF targets would be a foolish act they would be provoking a freindly and a powerfull neighbor nation!! (more powerfull not only in-terms of Conventional forces but also Unconventional means !). I seriously doubt Tajakis would allow IAF to attack PAF or Pak territory from there soil! and thats the end of that. give me a reason other then this fictitious Bulls form Insas and prove to me that IAF in CA has an anti pak agenda and it has the capability in-terms of resources and clearance to support a conflict with west side PAK.
the Afghanis would have no right to support a nation that is attacking its neighbor from its territory. IAF cannot expect its self to be sheilded by International laws when its is using others territory to sheild its self Wars get ugly!!
adsH, well, I'd have to say that I disagree with Insas. Using another country as a strike point (and considering the logistical burden and politcal problems associated with it) just does not make sense.
As for AWACs, read what I said, I hadn't said that Pakistan wasn't getting them - but as a response platform they are at least 2 years out from getting a squadron operational even if purchased tomorrow. You cannot just buy these platforms and get them airborne without establishing doctrine, without establishing ROE's with other combat elements, wothout defining command structures etc... They don't and cannot go "live" effectively on the day you buy them. From that historical perspective - they are a benign unit of opportunity.
I think India is just going through that stage where some countries start to do "offshore" asset parking. Much like Singapore, Australia - even New Zealand has combat assets based in other countries.
I don't see anything untoward in it at all. :eek
The notion of India initiating strikes from tajikistan just doesn't fit into the logical other opportunities if India was intent on being mischievous.
As for AWACs, read what I said, I hadn't said that Pakistan wasn't getting them - but as a response platform they are at least 2 years out from getting a squadron operational even if purchased tomorrow. You cannot just buy these platforms and get them airborne without establishing doctrine, without establishing ROE's with other combat elements, wothout defining command structures etc... They don't and cannot go "live" effectively on the day you buy them. From that historical perspective - they are a benign unit of opportunity.
I think India is just going through that stage where some countries start to do "offshore" asset parking. Much like Singapore, Australia - even New Zealand has combat assets based in other countries.
I don't see anything untoward in it at all. :eek
The notion of India initiating strikes from tajikistan just doesn't fit into the logical other opportunities if India was intent on being mischievous.
yeah GF PAF has been negoiating the AWAC deal since the start of the Augusta deal (i think ) and i would hate to be wrong. C&C and much of the upgrades is internal no one knows what goes around in there defense forces internal systems, it's possible theyve messed up things or its quiet possible theyve been fixing there C&C and improving it, what can be said for certain is that PAK Military treats it self as an organization that has to survive and it see's its countries sovereignty as integral part of its existence. so whenever sovereignty is threatened there existence is threatened and they don't like that.
what i want to say is that i don't know how exactly Doctrines are produced (every organization has different approaches). but i am sure ten years of planning to have such Assets have progressed the production of a doctrine.
what i want to say is that i don't know how exactly Doctrines are produced (every organization has different approaches). but i am sure ten years of planning to have such Assets have progressed the production of a doctrine.
errrrrrrrr MOD ,maybe this forum should be moved to strategic issues.
Well the idea of india launching strikes from tajikistan doesnt seem too far fetched to me. Its their notion of overstretching the PAF which aint gonna happen cuz the PAF normally deploys 2 or 3 squadrons in the west at peshawer and paybe some northern airfields. Besides in the event of a future war in which chinese supplies might come from air over perhaps afghanista to avoid the battle zone the matter becomes kinda academic. It would be more logical to stage aircraft in IRAN which is very much feasible ( no matter what the foreign office might say). Aircraft coming at naval bases along the coast line would be more troublesome than them coming over hilly areas where there radar makes them small potatoes. Yea.... iran would be more feasible as the north is already well defended. Afghani airspace wont be a problem. Even though the afghans hate the indians ( a fact u may be surprised at but go read this indian article " Afghanistan- the great divide" and ull see wat im tlkin abt). Afghan airspace is US airspace and as time goes on india and us will inch closer and the US will easily allow india to fly over afghanistan as if the poor pathans can do much abt it.
PS dont underestimate the ADGES. Even without the AEW systems it is damn formidable, with an unbelivable anti jamming capability and some of the worlds most advanced radars most of em chinese which arent a joke.
Well the idea of india launching strikes from tajikistan doesnt seem too far fetched to me. Its their notion of overstretching the PAF which aint gonna happen cuz the PAF normally deploys 2 or 3 squadrons in the west at peshawer and paybe some northern airfields. Besides in the event of a future war in which chinese supplies might come from air over perhaps afghanista to avoid the battle zone the matter becomes kinda academic. It would be more logical to stage aircraft in IRAN which is very much feasible ( no matter what the foreign office might say). Aircraft coming at naval bases along the coast line would be more troublesome than them coming over hilly areas where there radar makes them small potatoes. Yea.... iran would be more feasible as the north is already well defended. Afghani airspace wont be a problem. Even though the afghans hate the indians ( a fact u may be surprised at but go read this indian article " Afghanistan- the great divide" and ull see wat im tlkin abt). Afghan airspace is US airspace and as time goes on india and us will inch closer and the US will easily allow india to fly over afghanistan as if the poor pathans can do much abt it.
PS dont underestimate the ADGES. Even without the AEW systems it is damn formidable, with an unbelivable anti jamming capability and some of the worlds most advanced radars most of em chinese which arent a joke.
Quite an interesting range of options and scenarios we have had.Maybe that what the Indian defence planners and the IAF also have in mind , Make the PAF think. When a base straddles right across on the other side one's country and in the Indo-Pakistan scenario, assumption of assets simply being parked will not do.
Pakistan shall have to take away from either existing resources or require deployment of additional resources to maintain surveillance, maybe at the cost of some lesser priority allocation.This can only but suit the IAF.
Pakistan shall have to take away from either existing resources or require deployment of additional resources to maintain surveillance, maybe at the cost of some lesser priority allocation.This can only but suit the IAF.
india definitely is not crazy enough to send its airforce in another country. The fact is that tajikistan is (as far a I recall) surrounded by mountains and these mountains reach all the way to pakistans north western areas. By the way, all of these aircraft movements can easily be monitored so pakistan or china don't have to worry about anything. also, it would be fun to see the indians try to attack pakistan from afghanistan because there would definitely be a lot stinger sites waiting for their arrival!!! 
: : : :
: : : :
adsH said:
adsH, what I am saying is that you cannot determine doctrine in a virtual fashion. You can do the basics, but at the end of the day substantial work is required to test it with real platforms, to have those platforms interact with other assets, and to test combined arms in a proper wargaming environment. That means that you either start actively interacting with other friendly nations to train in absentia - or you wait until you have the hardware. Irrespective of whether ROE's have been formulated today - they are of limited use until platforms arrive and the whole process is "sanity checked"
Having an AWACs completely changes a tactical approach. Formulating doctrine without trialling it real time is as effective as warfighting in a SIM - of very limited and prescripted advantage. On top of that, Pakistan is looking at Eyrie, again a very different ABMS as it is dependant on GCI. That complicates the learning and development curve evem further as it has a greater dependancy on other assets. The Eyrie is not autonomous like a Phalcon. A need for realtime integration and ROE development is even larger even though it is a smaller and somewhat less capable system. It creates a number of dependancies that must be tested altogether.
corsair7772 said:
I'd really would question this. I've seen a number of evaluations on Chinese radar technology and to be blunt it is not that good - they are at the capability level that Russia was in the 80's - not even the 90's.
That is the reason why they have been vigorously trying to pursue tech arrangements with the Israelis and French. The French, Israelis and the Russians will not let China anywhere near their latest gear.
One can see by the way that they plan and design their long range sensors that they are stuck in a deifferent mindset re design issues - they are certainly not capable of competing against countries like Czekoslovakia who have a far greater design ability.
dabrownguy
New Member
:cry IAF will need more jets then!
fockewulf190
New Member
they are building SU30MKIs now in India......
and are buying 126 or so aircrafts and the LCAs.. that enough for one base I think....
regards :alian
and are buying 126 or so aircrafts and the LCAs.. that enough for one base I think....
regards :alian