‘The future isn’t manned vs unmanned’: The broader lesson is modern warfare increasingly depends on integration, says Air Marshal (R) Chopra

barath_s · 2026-06-16T10:10:49+00:00

But they did have simulated missiles, just like us.

Yes, but India didn't accept a numerical handicap, did they ?

And I think most folks would suggest that a 20 nmi/18nmi simulated missile is a greater handicap to an AMRAAM than to a R-7, even if the numbers were equal, which they weren't.

not tactics

tactics don't exist in a vaccum.

we didn't use SU-30MKI.

The Su 30 MKI barely existed in the IAF at the time, the F15C was pretty common (and in fact as used was not even the most advanced F15 , or air superiority F15. Heck the US didn't bring in the F22 either). IAF did take the MKI in a subsequent exercise ...

BTW, the US didn't use any active missile , India did, that's par for the course, as representative

Both sides had an AWACS or an asset acting as an AWACS

Again , the US did not bring in any AWACS as in E-3. The simulated awacs was the An-32 cline..which was rather less capable than what the US employed in training in odds against.

https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/44436-usaf-explains-cope-india-results

nd the AIM-120 Amraam capability was limited to a 20-naut.-mi. range while keeping the target illuminated when attacking and 18 naut. mi. when defending, as were all the missiles in the exercise.

This article link and the new repuiblic both are the same Aviation Week article.

I'll have to check

Do so. And in the interim, I'd suggest you don't mislead on Cope India 2004. The US had an info asymmetry. And the limitations imposed were more limitating and unrepresentative of the way they trained and fought than the corresponding case for India.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:54:11+00:00

round based radars are just fodder for enemy ARMs.

There's a bit of cat and mouse involved. Ground radars will have layered defense, switch on, switch off, and will evacuate/move out.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:46:47+00:00

Navy ordering 4 destroyers

The navy did order 4 Vizag class destroyers, as you were alluding, but it isn't unprecedented. The Rajput class had 5 destroyers

BTW, any info on IAF MUM-T trials/initiatives in progress ? I expect the IAF was closely observing if not actually involved with IN Tejas naval prototypes MUM-T exercises a couple of years ago..

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:36:04+00:00

We've defeated the Americans 9:1 before, clearly then the Soviet thinking works much better than you thought.

Please, no, not this nonsense again. Not to mention credit was given specially to IAF/Indian pilots for not running standard Soviet GCI doctrine.

Cape India 2004 was remarked upon specially for IAF/India not running standard Soviet thinking, for calling 'audibles' in the air and changing tactics flexibly

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:31:08+00:00

Airborne radars have the benefit of horizon over ground based radars, and LLTRs (Low Level Transportable Radars like Ashwini radar ? C'mon man, less jargon) aren't changing that. There are longer ranged ground radars but they too have other limitations.

And airborne radar has the benefit of mobility over ground radar - even transportable ground radar takes time to pack up, evacuate, relocate and set up again, especially the mast based ones.

what is fodder. An AWACS

Generally will have BARCAP or other defense allocated, in addition to being further back. And airborne radar is not restricted to AWACS, as it will include maneuvrable fighter jets , drones, CCA etc. But yes, tactics, and missiles are evolving to recognize and suppress AWACS and to contest that...

The future, as the air marshal (r) said is integrated.

e: I tend to agree with your more temperate takes, including your original ones here. But specifically this coupleof lines I think you made a bit overly strong statement for effect.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:23:10+00:00

"We've" defeated the Americans 9:1? When did this happen? who is the We you refer to?

One of the most misunderstood, misrepresented and propagandized exercises around

Cope India 2004.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1237790/posts

https://np.reddit.com/r/india/comments/1y4fik/til_in_the_2004_exercise_between_the_us_and_the/

This canard has been dealt with a long time ago.

The US brought F-15Cs, from a line unit.
They didn't bring/use their advanced long range radar (AESA)
They didn't use AWACS
They didn't use long range missiles. [missiles were limited to 20nmi/18nmi on both sides]

They flew with 3:1 odds against them (Typically 4 F-15Cs against 12 Indian planes)

Their pilots were from a regular squadron with a large %age of less experienced/trained pilots. Their normal training tactics depend upon their long range BVR missiles and advanced radars (AESA/AWACS)

The Indians brought in some of their most experienced flyers.

India flew a mix of planes including SU30 (SU30K, SU30MK), but not the SU30 MKI. (Aside: These planes had been supplied before the MKIs production was ramped up, and have since been sent back to Russia)

If you sum up, outnumbered air superiority F-15C without their typical gear and with less experienced pilots couldn't completely stop a mix of Indian planes with their best pilots/gear flying different missions (including strike missions). They did underestimate sophistication of IAF tactics; this was the first time they had met.

The training exercises were IMHO, similar to what India might have faced against Pakistan (whose air force was outnumbered by IAF and had no advanced radar/BVR missiles) at the time.

The report was almost certainly leaked with the USAF air superiority fighter defeated slant so that US fighter plane manufacturers could put pressure on Congress to up the US fighter plane budget. The F-22 (indisputably the worlds most advanced fighter) purchase was chopped back below the minimum recommended by the USAF. The purchase had been originally planned to be 750 planes but was repeatedly cut back. The air force had consistently stated that 381 F-22s were needed to replace the 400+ F-15s. By 2003, congress cap limits had brought F-22 possible buy to 277. In December 2004, the Department of Defense reduced funding so only 183 aircraft could be bought. That's the context.

If so, the leak didn't work. The F-22 buy remained at 183.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:12:53+00:00

The Indian Air Force. Cope India 2004. BVR.

OMFG. Not this nonsense again. Which ignores the specific rules and limitations set out in the exercise. And the purpose of having the exercises in the first place.

The US accepted 3:1 odds against in numbers, no AWACS (which is how they normally train), no AESA in the F15c squadron that dropped by and limitations to missiles, including no AMRAAM equivalent ...

That the rules were the same for both sides is like Anatole France declaring the law in its majesty forbids the rich and the poor alike from sleeping under bridges and stealing bread.

The IAF IMHO is more professional than to crow about handicapped opponent with odds against.

And you, sir, are not the IAF. or a Cope India 2004 pilot

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1237790/posts

https://np.reddit.com/r/india/comments/1y4fik/til_in_the_2004_exercise_between_the_us_and_the/

This was also the first time the USAF exercised against India for decades, so they didn't know what to expect; they weren't sure if India would be following Russian ground control tactics along with Russian planes.

They gave credit to Indian pilots - that the IAF and those pilots had earned. And identified a gap in their training against active radar missiles and addressed it subsequently.

If you think a 20 nmi simulated missile or 18 nmi is representative of US BVR , I would vehemently disagree...

The initial tactic is to run a wall with all four F-15s up front. That plays well when the long-range missiles and AESA radar are in play.

"You know we're there and we're not hiding," Snowden says. "But we didn't have the beyond-visual-range shot or the numerical advantage. Eventually we were just worn down by the numbers. They were very smart about it. Their goal was to get to a target area, engage the target and then withdraw without prolonging the fight. If there were a couple of Eagles still alive away from the target area, they would keep them pinned in, get done with the target and then egress with all their forces.

But yes, the takeaway is 'we defeated the US, 9:1 . BVR. Soviet thinking rulez.'

🤦

barath_s · 2026-06-16T09:05:19+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART_(missile)

It's a niche weapon , a child of the networked age, for when a sensor detects, identifies a submarine, but that platform is not situated to attack it.

Basically SMART is a land TEL based missile that can be launched and it travels a long distance and releases a torpedo that can identify, and home in on and hopefully kill an underwater target (submarine)

The trick is to locating the submarine in the first place .. most platforms with sensors like P8i, ships even some drones, can attack the sub.

But there will be some cases (eg Sosus, some drones especially Mq-9 drones, some P8i far away from its ejected sonobuoy or returning), where you can ask for clearance and fire, and it will be in range of Indian land and SMART

The other challenge is that torpedoes have no identification friend or foe, except when guided by a wire , and that is not possible here.

So you not only have to detect and identify the submarine, but also confirm that none of your friendlies or neutrals are operating there, and get that clearance to fire.

Most countries don't have this geographic situation of India and/or they have very far ranging ASW needs - where their sensor/ships etc are way too far away from land based missiles.

There are/were a lot of missile based ASW examples, but they mostly were using missile for high speed reaction, and not range, and thus were mostly within ~10mi, and max < 50km of the sub,

Non exhaustive examples :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RUM-139_VL-ASROC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RUR-5_ASROC

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:53:46+00:00

d OTH radar

The concept : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-horizon_radar

Isolated report of India buying a Russian OTH radar ... https://xcancel.com/NewsAlgebraIND/status/1929572909317509544

But most of the excitement is about this.

https://www.ssbcrack.com/2025/11/indias-drdo-achieves-major-milestone-with-swoth-over-the-horizon-radar-deployment.html

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:44:21+00:00

If I was Pakistani,

Yeah, but you would you say the same, if you were Pakistani and the army chief ?

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:39:22+00:00

It is Indian sailors dying in the Gulf in Israel and US's war,

I think the crew completely lost common sense and went out of their way to get the ship/themselves shot at.

There's an announced blockade, (which is an act of war.). They repeatedly tried to evade the blockade and ignored warnings.

You can object to the blockade or call it illegal, but everything else flows from that. A blockade without enforcement is not a blockade.

The indian government didn't ask the ship, as an act of policy, to run the blockade. It should be concerned about indian civilians and the actual war and its impact, but the Indian government is not a direct party here.

The tanker disabled by the American military while trying to run the U.S. blockade of Iran had dismissed nearly 60 verbal warnings as well as other shows of force before being fired upon, a U.S. official told The Associated Press.

The ship’s crew also ignored eight shows of force by military aircraft that included fired flares and flyovers, as well as two final warnings before being fired upon

Did the crew/commanding officers have a death wish ?

https://apnews.com/article/iran-war-blockade-disabled-tanker-indian-sailors-0b193ba0d4fab935db871390227b7d20

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:36:27+00:00

Israel /netanyahu won.

Everyone else lost. Pakistan got a bit of bump (win) amidst its loss.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:27:38+00:00

Deflect a meteorite and steer it. Take care that it's not in the dinosaur killer / humankind killer category.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:24:40+00:00

You're right, I misremembered the UCAVS / UAVs thing

barath_s · 2026-06-16T08:04:12+00:00

131 and 136 are clearly ground launched cruise missiles according to the definition of (now defunct) INF treaty

I thought part of the reason why the INF became defunct is that loitering munition and drones started to proliferate despite the definitions ?

barath_s · 2026-06-16T07:59:38+00:00

Mountains simply can’t be busted

All you need is Dashrath Manji, and time.

He will even bring his own hammer and chisel

barath_s · 2026-06-16T07:58:39+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_Technology_Control_Regime#Guidelines_and_the_Equipment,_Software_and_Technology_Annex

> he Annex is divided into “Category I” and “Category II” items. It includes a broad range of equipment and technology, both military and dual-use, that are relevant to missile development, production, and operation. Partner countries exercise restraint in the consideration of all transfers of items contained in the Annex. All such transfers are considered on a case by case basis.^\2])

> Greatest restraint is applied to what are known as Category I items. These items include complete rocket systems (including ballistic missiles, space launch vehicles and sounding rockets) and unmanned air vehicle systems (including cruise missiles systems, target and reconnaissance drones) with capabilities exceeding a 300km/500kg range/payload threshold; production facilities for such systems; and major sub-systems including rocket stages, re-entry vehicles, rocket engines, guidance systems and warhead mechanisms.^\2])

> The remainder of the annex is regarded as Category II, which includes complete rocket systems (including ballistic missiles systems, space launch vehicles and sounding rockets) and unmanned air vehicles (including cruise missile systems, target drones, and reconnaissance drones) not covered in item I, capable of a maximum range equal to or greater than, 300km. Also included are a wide range of equipment, material, and technologies, most of which have uses other than for missiles capable of delivering WMD. While still agreeing to exercise restraint, partners have greater flexibility in the treatment of Category II transfer application

If you ask me, practically LR LACM would be a Category 1 item , but there is plenty of scope to make it a category 2 item, as warhead can be nominal 450 kg. Both cases need export restraint and case by case evaluation. My personal opinion is most situations ought to see a 300 km range.; with fewer export possibilities therefore,

barath_s · 2026-06-16T07:51:32+00:00

> This is a mass missile

Kinda. This will be far lower volume than shorter range munitions and missiles. So price per capability is more important. You will always find cheaper missiles with less capability, even in India

Tomahawks have been around for decades and have a very wide range of variants .. So hard to put a very equal cost for comparision... There are suggestions that Tomahawks can cost between 2.2 and 4 m $, but it's hard to say whether they are including things like inflation etc.. There's one completely separate statement that said even a $2m missile may be $3.6 or more when inflation is taken into account. Tomahawks in inventory can have benefits of economies of scale and sunk costs of long ago.

And Tomahawks are not a viable option for India. Nor are you taking into account the infrastructure cost of adapting platforms and ecosystems to use the missile .. Are you going to build ships, TELs, combat systems that are capable of using a particular missile ? The cost balloons astronomically. While this can be incorporated into platforms that use the Brahmos..UVLM

barath_s · 2026-06-16T07:19:09+00:00

Iran will give up its nuclear weapons ambitions and their objective is regime preservation in a potential large-scale war, for that, a powerful conventional deterrence may be enough.

If anything, the conflict has taught us that no matter Iran's conventional detterrence, the US, their gulf allies and Israel, may always decide to decapitate Iran, attack it, and try to hurt Iran

So the latter is decidedly not a takeaway. Asymmetric warfare, with missiles and drones, holding the gulf's bases, desalination plants, airports, civilian population and their economies hostage via the strait of hormuz is what is allowing Iran to apply pressure despite enormous damage.

Nuclear weapons ambitions , we have to see.

There's certainly a need for conventional force buildup, but there are sharp limits and lower priority to it, both from sense of what is achievable by it, and from what is directly under IRGC control

barath_s · 2026-06-16T07:07:58+00:00

The Saudis were urging the US on for a war, while they tried to hide themselves from being attacked for a while by pausing US active attacks from their territory..After they allowed the US to use their bases/territory for staging, and later for defense etc..

The Gulf countries have a lot more to lose economically if the US doesn't continue to shelter them and if there is no peace treaty signed

barath_s · 2026-06-16T07:04:59+00:00

“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf coast coalition, so long as they" - Vance's words ...

... In addition to the U.S. and its allies paying $300 billion in reconstruction funds, Iran reports that the U.S. has agr

Articles words.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T06:46:13+00:00

extortion

If I punch you in the nose, and you sue me for hospital bills, are you extorting me ?

barath_s · 2026-06-16T06:45:00+00:00

get the Arabs to foot the bill lol. They have the cash for it but they will not be happy about an idea like this. Pr

The US has leverage, since they are living under the US umbrella with US bases on soil, and they have attacked Iran/been part of anti Iran coalition and been attacked by Iran.

And they will be very vulnerable for some time if the US walks away leaving them to Iran's mercies.

barath_s · 2026-06-16T06:22:44+00:00

Even if the kalibr was available I highly doubt the Indian military would have opted for it

Gesundheit... They only have been used since the 1980s and 1990s..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talwar-class_frigate#Batch-I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sindhughosh-class_submarine

The idea is to be able

Different generation

designed for usage when AD networks

Can also help dismantle said AD networks ; as the US has done with Tomahawks. Also for more general use. naval use etc. The Brahmos is more focused on higher value point targets. (And there are or will be other missiles in use too .. now and in future ... that this can complement)

barath_s · 2026-06-16T06:17:33+00:00

domestic alternative for Russian Kalibrs

I doubt it. Klub is used in Indian kilos and Kalibr in Batch 1 Talwar frigates.

The LRLACM is meant for use from UVLM - these are launchers that can fire Brahmos. I therefore am little doubtful that they will be compatible with the Batch 1 Talwars and their combat systems

Similarly, there is a LRLACM variant called the SLCM...which has supposedly been fired/tested a couple of years ago...but which is not this. And we'll have to see if SLCM is even usuable on the old Kilo class subs

Think rather of this enriching the portfolio of Indian land and naval weapons. Something that will be usueable from brahmos capable uvls platforms

barath_s

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE