Airliners-India Forum Index Airliners-India
Flickr Group & Facebook
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Indo-China war of 1962 and Air Power.
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Airliners-India Forum Index -> Military Aviation & Space
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:53 am    Post subject: Indo-China war of 1962 and Air Power. Reply with quote

Air power and 1962 Indo-China war.

New Delhi, Oct. 5: Air Chief Marshal N.A.K. Browne today waded into a controversy relating to the 1962 China war that has dogged military analysts and historians as well as the government.
The air chief suggested a closer look into the alleged failure of the politico-military leadership under India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. The hostilities with China broke out in September-October 50 years ago.
“If airpower was used, the outcome would have been different,” Browne said. The Indian Air Force transport planes moved troops and equipment but that was barely enough for a war in the heights.
Asked if Nehru had “blundered” by not ordering the air force into offensive action against the Chinese troops, the air chief smiled and replied: “You have read the book Himalayan Blunder, haven’t you?”
Himalayan Blunder was written by Brig. John Dalvi, commander of the 7th Brigade, which was routed by the Chinese troops in Arunachal. Dalvi was himself taken prisoner.
The book, which offers his perspective on the causes and outcome of the war, was banned by the Indian government immediately after its publication. Dalvi held that, among others, the political administration headed by Nehru misdirected the war.
On airpower, Browne said: “I am absolutely sure of this. In future, the air force will not be limited in its operations.” To support his case, he added something that could stoke another row on whether “Operation Safed Sagar” of 1999 was really successful: “Look at Kargil (1999). Had the air force not been involved, it would have dragged on for months.”
“Safed Sagar” was the name of the air operations in the 1999 war in the Kargil heights to drive out Pakistan-backed intruders. The army believes it was its infantry and artillery that were instrumental in driving out the intruders.
This year, the Indian Air Force is celebrating its 80th anniversary. Browne said he had been with the force for half its life.
Fifty years after the defeat in the 1962 war, the political establishment in New Delhi — especially under a Congress-led government — is still touchy about the events and the outcome of the hostilities when Nehru was Prime Minister.
The government continues to reject pleas to de-classify the army’s inquiry report, authored by an officer, Lt Gen. Henderson-Brookes, arguing that its findings are still relevant to operations.
The Centre for Airpower Studies (CAPS), a think-tank backed by the IAF, would be hosting a brainstorming session later this month on the use of airpower in the context of the 1962 war, the air chief said.
Browne said the government had sanctioned Rs 1,750 crore to upgrade airfields in the Northeast, many of which serve military posts on the China front. But work has been tardy. “It will take another three or four years,” he said.
The Telegraph : http://www.telegraphindia.com/1121006/jsp/frontpage/story_16058738.jsp
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aseem
Member


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2840
Location: YYZ

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

read one of the comments by readers! We hardly had any AF at that time, by the time Americans (read elsewhere) the war ended. Maybe that's what prompted Chinese withdrawal.

rgds
VT-ASJ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
HAWK21M
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DTA......Dont trust Anybody when it comes to our neighbours.....works even today.....
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HAWK21M wrote:
DTA......Dont trust Anybody when it comes to our neighbours.....works even today.....


That is not true, India had Canberra bombers and Hawker Hunters in 1962. Both were very capable aircrafts and could damage Chinese lines of communication , supply and troops movement significantly. Only Mr.Nehru did not know what to do with all those aircrafts. But you are correct, American troops landed in Dum Dum airport ( November 1962 ) and China withdrew. Last thing they wanted to see was Indian army under US air cover. Very Happy
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HAWK21M
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 8132
Location: Mumbai, INDIA

PostPosted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:
HAWK21M wrote:
DTA......Dont trust Anybody when it comes to our neighbours.....works even today.....


That is not true, India had Canberra bombers and Hawker Hunters in 1962. Both were very capable aircrafts and could damage Chinese lines of communication , supply and troops movement significantly. Only Mr.Nehru did not know what to do with all those aircrafts. But you are correct, American troops landed in Dum Dum airport ( November 1962 ) and China withdrew. Last thing they wanted to see was Indian army under US air cover. Very Happy


The chinese have numbers.......simulate best quality of the USA with the quantity of china in terms of Airpower or land forces today....guess who will likely to win.

The best lesson learnt by India is stop getting betrayed everytime......
_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
The_Goat
Member


Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 3257
Location: South of France

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:

That is not true, India had Canberra bombers and Hawker Hunters in 1962. Both were very capable aircrafts and could damage Chinese lines of communication , supply and troops movement significantly. Only Mr.Nehru did not know what to do with all those aircrafts. But you are correct, American troops landed in Dum Dum airport ( November 1962 ) and China withdrew. Last thing they wanted to see was Indian army under US air cover. Very Happy



There was no way we could have used Canberras and Hunters to destroy Chinese supply lines as we had no forward bases near the China border at that time, and these aircraft don't have that much range.

Heck, when we couldn't even touch the Pakistani supply lines in the 1965 war, how could we have destroyed the Chinese ones in 1962?
_________________
I don't know which is the more pampered bunch : AI's widebodies (the aunties) or Jet's widebodies (the planes).
-Jasepl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Goat wrote:
sabya99 wrote:

That is not true, India had Canberra bombers and Hawker Hunters in 1962. Both were very capable aircrafts and could damage Chinese lines of communication , supply and troops movement significantly. Only Mr.Nehru did not know what to do with all those aircrafts. But you are correct, American troops landed in Dum Dum airport ( November 1962 ) and China withdrew. Last thing they wanted to see was Indian army under US air cover. Very Happy



There was no way we could have used Canberras and Hunters to destroy Chinese supply lines as we had no forward bases near the China border at that time, and these aircraft don't have that much range.

Heck, when we couldn't even touch the Pakistani supply lines in the 1965 war, how could we have destroyed the Chinese ones in 1962?


@The Goat , thanks for commenting on my post. If I remember correctly in 1962 there were at least four or five airbases available for launching Canberra/Hawker Hunters into Chinese held territory: Dibrugarh, Tejpore ,Guahati ,Bagdogra and possibly Hassimara. Canberras with a range of 2000 miles could damage a lot Chinese real estate in Tibet. Knowledgeable sources claim presence of Hunter in Assam prevented China from using its Soviet bombers ( Il-4 ? ). Please remember Chinese line of control much more sensitive to airpower than Indian side. Also they have very long supply line compared to India. Indian Air Force in its current format knew that .It is the indecisiveness at the highest level of GOI that lead to the defeat of Indian forces. On the contrary in the Pakistan front supply lines are short and not as formidable as Tibet.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Chinese medium-range bomber of Soviet origin was the Il-28 `Beagle' bomber. They also had a few Tu-16 `Badger' derivatives (some of which may still be in service now, since they were mass-produced, ditto for the Il-2Cool. And while the Canberra was a bomber, the Hunter was more of an interceptor, with an additional ground support role. The Hunter is regarded as possibly the best sub-sonic interceptor ever designed. It was widely regarded for its flying qualities, which made the IAF opt for this type for its first aerobatics team in the 1980s, the `Thunderbolts'. All taken into account, the Himalayas are still a very formidable territory for any Air Force, even with very modern hardware. Even in the Kargil conflict, the balance of power shifted only when India's proven multi-role aircraft, the Mirage-2000, started busting positions from very high altitudes, with the laser-guided bombs. The earlier repeated sorties with the Mig-23BNs and the Mig-27s: both bombers, were not proving effective. That one day when Sq Ldr Nachiketa's and his companion's Mig-27 engines flared out and failed to re-light, and the Mi-26 gunship went down to Stingers, changed the strategy completely. Fl Lt Ahuja's Mig-21 search for the two downed Mig-27s was sheer bravery. These are such amazing people, heros whom we all salute. The Mig-27s have earlier had engine problems at very high altitudes, too, and the IAF had some heuristics to tackle these. But this was war. The Jaguar was challenging to use at such high altitudes, and the Su-30 MKI was perhaps far too new to try them out. Of course, the Indian Army did what no one, even in their wildest imagination, ever thought of. Take Tiger Hill. Amazing.
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not sure when China received its Il-28 and Tu-16, possibly later on in seventies and not 1962.
Airfields in Tibet are very high altitude as a result not suitable for launching large heavy bombers. On the contrary nearby India airfields are more or less at sea level and suitable for launching heavy bombers. Hawker Hunters would have been most ideal aircrafts for disrupting Chinese supply line in erstwhile NEFA border areas. It had proven track record of ground attack role in both 1965 and 1971 wars. No matter which aircraft IAF uses ,it could influence strategic balance in Indo-China border in 1962 as also today. High peaks of Himalayas should not matter.
Capture of Tiger Hill in Kargill war was entirely different story. It was the skill of Indian artillery brigade that was responsible this victory.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is not correct, Sabyasachi. China had the Il-28 `Beagle' and the Tu-16 `Badger' bombers in 1962. Further, I guess you haven't talked to too many IAF officers, especially those who have served in the North and the North East. High peaks should not matter theoretically. Ground reality(!) is something a bit different. Both countries are developing their missiles. It is only of late that one talks about the Chinese Su-27s and Indian Su-30MKIs having the capability to fly sorties around the place. The Hunters and Canberras were more than good for the Pakistan wars, but certainly not for the Himalayas, against China. Photo ops for aircraft against the backdrop of the Himalayas is fine, but certainly not in a combat situation. Your point about a ghastly political mistake in going to war with China - is all but well-known.
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@ Sumantra, I checked references after your last post and you are right. China received IL-28 in 1955 and Tu-16 in 1959 from Soviet Union. But they did not used these aircrafts as India had Hunter aircrafts already or they could not find high value targets near the border or Tibetian airfields were not suitable for launching these aircrafts. But I am convinced if IAF was used at right moment , history would have been different. Very Happy
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
747-237
Member


Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 10968
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a young Flt. Lt., my old man flew Antonov AN-12s in the 1962 war, and received this commendation for his actions, in the summer of 1963.


_________________
10000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shivendrashukla
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 1354
Location: Mumbai, India

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

747-237 wrote:
As a young Flt. Lt., my old man flew Antonov AN-12s in the 1962 war, and received this commendation for his actions, in the summer of 1963.



This is priceless. Well done.

Operational command is now Western Air Command.

Cheers
Shivendra
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wonderful, wonderful - this is a real matter of pride, for all of you whose parents were/are in the Armed Forces, and those who are, themselves! Thanks for sharing this wonderful bit of historical pride with all of us on this forum!
Admiringly,
Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hats off to your old man. He must have saved lives of many Indian troops in China border. Yes, AN-12 had tail mounted guns. By the way I remember Air Marshal Pinto, his life was ended in a tragic chopper crash a few years later in Kashmir.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:
But I am convinced if IAF was used at right moment , history would have been different. Very Happy


Sabyasachi, I guess you are privy to some information which many of our armed forces and strategic planners have missed out in the last six decades or so, and it may not be very prudent to divulge the details on an open forum such as this.

On a different note, it is not that the Canberras have not been used in the high altitudes. I am quoting from an exchange that I had with member Shivendra on this forum itself, quite some time back. I quote this without his permission, though I am quite sure he wouldn't mind it.

Sumantra: ``...About the Su-7 - yes! The one you are talking about is a frame
piloted by Flying Officer H. S. Mangat. It is an amazing tribute
to both the hardy Su-7, as well as the brave officer. He flew it
back in with most of its control surfaces out of order -
incredible. A Canberra recee aircraft also flew back in a similar
condition during the Kargil war - this is an incident which does
not find ready mention, but is a tribute to the engineering corps
of the IAF, the Canberra, as well as the officer involved.''

Shivendra: ``Yes. The Canberra flew back from Kargil all the way back to Agra, its home base. The pilot and the EO refused to believe that it
flew back after they have had a look at the damage. The entire
engine cowling along with a part of the wing had been ripped off
by the stinger.''

Sumantra: ``Some postscript with regard to that amazing Canberra.
The Pakistani soldier who fired the Stinger missile possibly never
recovered from the shock. He had just seen overhead, in pristine
mint condition, a plane which his grandfather may have flown.
All eye-witnesses did not report the incident, as they knew
nobody would believe a word of what they would describe. A
Canberra flying overhead, about half a century after the last
plane was manufactured. Moreover, they had failed to down such a
slow-flying aircraft, even after taking it by surprise.''

Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aseem
Member


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2840
Location: YYZ

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Canberra in Kargil...complete shock! Why did they send those sitting ducks to those mountains....hats off to that pilot.

Quote:
When the sturdy Canberra saved its crew despite a missile hit
Submitted by admin on 13 May 2007 - 5:36pm

Features
By Prashant K. Nanda, Indo-Asian News Service

Agra: It was 9 a.m. on May 21, 1999. A Canberra bomber was flying on reconnaissance duty over a hill in Kargil when a Pakistani Stinger missile slammed into it, damaging the engine and portions of the plane. But the sturdy aircraft did not fail its crew, it carried them back to the base.

"We all are alive," said crewmembers of the warrior plane, profusely thanking the Canberra, which was phased out of the Indian Air Force Friday.

"The Kargil (in Jammu and Kashmir) operation was on full swing. We took off from Ambala air base on a photo reconnaissance duty and were assigned to photograph the exact positioning of our enemy in seven different locations northeast of a hill in Kargil when we experienced a violent jolt," said Wing Commander Uday Kant Jha, who was navigator of the aircraft.

"For a moment, we were thrown completely out of our senses. Our first reaction was - we may not live beyond a few minutes," Jha told IANS, almost eight years after the Kargil conflict.

"The US-made Stinger missile, fired by Pakistani soldiers, damaged our starboard (right) engine. At least two meters of the jet pipe was damaged and there were some holes in other places as well," he said, narrating his experience.

The IAF escort aircraft reported seeing a bright flash along with debris flying off and smoke emanating from the Canberra's right engine.

Jha said that initially he and his pilot A. Perumal decided to eject out of the hit plane but decided otherwise after realising that the fuel tank was intact.

"I salute the plane and its unchallenged valour. We are alive today because of the Canberra and its reliability," said Perumal, recounting the eventful day when he was in the cockpit.

Besides the crew's skill and efficiency it was the fighter aircraft that supported them ably in their return to the Srinagar air base.

"We returned safe within 30 minutes of the missile hit and that too with the photographs intact, which helped us in our further operation," he said.

Wing Commander Jha said it was only after they reached Srinagar air base that they were able to gauge the magnitude of the damage to the craft. "We simply thanked the aircraft for not falling apart in the sky."

"Though I got the 'Vayu Sena Medal' and Group Captain Perumal received the Shaurya Chakra, yet we believe that a lot of credit goes to the warrior bird," Jha said.

Canberra, the only bomber of the IAF until the late 1970s, was inducted into the Air Force in May 1957. The bomber was phased out Friday after serving the nation for 50 long years.

The British-origin twin-engine jet bomber has been a force to reckon with in the then prevailing war scenario in the Indian subcontinent. Cruising at four-fifths the speed of sound at 40,000 feet, Canberra was the right weapons carrier then. It could carry the war well beyond the frontiers, deep into the enemy territory.

It performed stellar service during the liberation of Goa in 1961, during the 1965 and 1971 wars against Pakistan, and also during the 1999 Kargil conflict. The Canberra also served with India's UN peacekeeping contingent in the Congo in the 1960s.

Hailing its contribution, IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal Fali Major, termed the fighter plane as the "eye of the nation" and said: "No other aircraft ever has served that long and as gloriously as the Canberra."


http://twocircles.net/2007may13/when-sturdy-canberra-saved-its-crew-despite-missile-hit.html

VT-ASJ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aseem wrote:
Canberra in Kargil...complete shock! Why did they send those sitting ducks to those mountains....hats off to that pilot.

Sitting duck? Not quite. You may be interested to know that the Martin RB-57F is still in service in the US. This design is based on the Canberra. One prime design feature is the really high altitude reconnaissance (some of these design elements were incorporated into the Black Lady, the U-2 spy plane, it is said, by the Lockheed Skunk Works). The Kargil action needed a few low passes as well, that is when the Canberra got hit. One point that we have perhaps missed out is the IAF's incredible engineering maintenance. To keep such an old lady in pristine condition - hats off to them!
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aseem
Member


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2840
Location: YYZ

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sumantra wrote:
One point that we have perhaps missed out is the IAF's incredible engineering maintenance. To keep such an old lady in pristine condition - hats off to them!
Cheers, Sumantra.


Got to agree with you! When Fairchild Packet were phased out, the Brits attending the ceremony commented,"We thought only Japan had suicide pilots".

Just wondering, why couldn't they have used MIG-25/31 instead of Canberra. Does low fly pass that probably Canberra can do better than MIGs was the reason behind it??

VT-ASJ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aseem wrote:
When Fairchild Packet were phased out, the Brits attending the ceremony commented,"We thought only Japan had suicide pilots".

I am not sure if that is indeed correct. The `Flying Boxcar' with the Jet Pack has had an unblemished record with the IAF. One of my very senior IAF acquaintances, considers it to be the finest transport aircraft before the limitations of a piston-engined transport, and age, took over. They were retired around the same time as the other piston-engined transport, the DC-3 Dakota. The An-12 had engine-out stability issues. The An-32 possibly suits the IAF the best: excellent hot and high performance. The Do-228 is for light transport, and the Il-76, for heavy ones. The HAL-748 is possibly to be retired soon, after some good service.

As regards the above remark, one should again remember that the IAF often showed the true worth of a design, which even its designers may have scoffed at, or given up on. The example of the Folland Gnat comes to mind, along with the Mig-21. The Gnat was almost given up by the Brits. With the IAF, the Gnat and its later development, the Ajeet, saw stellar service. A Mig-21 `Bison' in the hands of an experienced pilot, is still a formidable machine.

Aseem wrote:
Just wondering, why couldn't they have used MIG-25/31 instead of Canberra. Does low fly pass that probably Canberra can do better than MIGs was the reason behind it??

Very simply, put, yes! The Mig-25 `Foxbat' is essentially a very high altitude plane, hence its application to very fast and high altitude reconnaissance. As an interceptor, it has some exceptionally poor qualities at low levels (including speed!), and maneuverability. It has a huge radar signature. It was not designed for this, however. Its exceptional speed and incredibly high altitude are its forte. It The IAF does have the Mig-31 `Foxhound', which will not do it much good, either. The Mig-31 gets rid of a few of the defects of the Mig-25, and is mainly an interceptor. However, the IAF was possibly wise enough not to have this type, as the Mig-25s gave it what was required.
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sumantra wrote : A Canberra recee aircraft also flew back in a similar
condition during the Kargil war - this is an incident which does
not find ready mention, but is a tribute to the engineering corps
of the IAF, the Canberra, as well as the officer involved.''
Canberra aircrafts were based in Kalaikunda and their base workshop is IAF’s skunk workshop and they deserve all the credit.
Sumantra: Sabyasachi, I guess you are privy to some information which many of our armed forces and strategic planners have missed out in the last six decades or so, and it may not be very prudent to divulge the details on an open forum such as this.
That’s not true. Desi news papers are more interested in sex scandals, bribery and tax evasion related issues over military techno.related issue. Perhaps presence of strict vegetarians have compounded antimilitary techno. sentiments in India. In any desi gatherings such issues are rarely discussed. Those who discuss are people like myself who live in web space.
At the height of Kargil war , a few days after heroic attack on Tiger Hills by India’s field artillery brigade a vivid several part description was published in Star-Ledger news paper of New Jersey. I got much of my information from that source. But that newspaper clip I have lost during the move on later days. Also both NY Times and India Abroad published very informative stories about Indo Pak Nuke confrontation of those days. You may look older versions of these news papers or get cross references from Wikipedia. I keep losing old newspaper clips and don’t read them very well also. I doubt such information will ever be published in any desi newspaper. You may also look into Foreign Affairs magazine.
Aseem wrote: Just wondering, why couldn't they have used MIG-25/31 instead of Canberra. Does low fly pass that probably Canberra can do better than MIGs was the reason behind it??
Yes, they used MIG -25 for high speed interception of Pak-F16. But active airspace was too small and both side did not want to escalate this aspect of war. MIG-25 is an interceptor/recon aircraft also based in Kalaikunda in those days. But there was a general sense of confusion and chaos in IAF high command in those dark days.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:
MIG-25 is an interceptor/recon aircraft also based in Kalaikunda in those days.

I have seen one from Kalaikunda banking over IITKgp in 1995 - what a sight! This is the only time I have seen one flying. The last few were `officially' retired from Bareilly. The IAF had a maximum of 8 (6+2 two-seat trainers) at any point in time, and could often go places.
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aseem
Member


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2840
Location: YYZ

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sumantra wrote:
sabya99 wrote:
MIG-25 is an interceptor/recon aircraft also based in Kalaikunda in those days.

I have seen one from Kalaikunda banking over IITKgp in 1995 - what a sight! This is the only time I have seen one flying. The last few were `officially' retired from Bareilly. The IAF had a maximum of 8 (6+2 two-seat trainers) at any point in time, and could often go places.
Cheers, Sumantra.


I once had an argument with a kiddo who claimed his uncle flew MIG-31 off Bareilly. I stressed it must be either 21 or 25, as we didn't have 31. But the kiddo was persistent that it was neither 21 or 25, but 31. Is there any chance we had a few of 31s, but never made public.

VT-ASJ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aseem wrote:
I once had an argument with a kiddo who claimed his uncle flew MIG-31 off Bareilly. I stressed it must be either 21 or 25, as we didn't have 31. But the kiddo was persistent that it was neither 21 or 25, but 31. Is there any chance we had a few of 31s, but never made public.

The Soviets/Russians may have brought a plane to display in India (and displayed it at Bareilly), but India never leased or purchased any Mig-31. The Mig bureau was very eager to replace the Mig-25s with Mig-31s (interestingly, no viable recee versions of the Mig-31 were built, which possibly India needed. India's Mig-25s were all the recee kind). Leases and purchases are never done in secret, even during wars. A Tu-126 `Moss' AWACS was leased from the Soviet Union during the 1971 Indo-Pak war. Four nuclear-capable Tu-22M `Backfire' bombers were leased from Russia for a few years post the 1998 nuclear tests. All this is public knowledge.
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vivekman
Member


Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 1897
Location: BOM

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sumantra wrote:
Four nuclear-capable Tu-22M `Backfire' bombers were leased from Russia for a few years post the 1998 nuclear tests. All this is public knowledge.
Cheers, Sumantra.


Are these still with the IAF? If yes, where are they based at?

Any photos?
_________________
Boeing makes planes. Airbus makes videogames!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vivekman wrote:
Are these still with the IAF? If yes, where are they based

The Navy had leased them, Vivek, and from what I have heard, they have been long returned. How did you, of all people, miss photographing this plane? Smile
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shivendrashukla
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 1354
Location: Mumbai, India

PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:

Yes, they used MIG -25 for high speed interception of Pak-F16. But active airspace was too small and both side did not want to escalate this aspect of war. MIG-25 is an interceptor/recon aircraft also based in Kalaikunda in those days. But there was a general sense of confusion and chaos in IAF high command in those dark days.


MiG 25 cannot be used as an interceptor. The damn thing takes like a 100km diameter to make a full 360 turn. The one based at KKD was on lease, not with IAF.

Can you please elaborate about the chaos??

Cheers
Shivendra
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shivendrashukla
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 1354
Location: Mumbai, India

PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vivekman wrote:
Are these still with the IAF? If yes, where are they based at?

Any photos?


As Sumantra already mentioned, they were leased by Navy. They were based at Arakonnam NAS.

Shivendra
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vivekman
Member


Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 1897
Location: BOM

PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sumantra wrote:
The Navy had leased them, Vivek, and from what I have heard, they have been long returned. How did you, of all people, miss photographing this plane? Smile
Cheers, Sumantra.


Ah I see. I never saw them anywhere close to BOM.

They were based at Arakkonam naval base as per Shivendra.
_________________
Boeing makes planes. Airbus makes videogames!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sumantra
Member


Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4685
Location: New Delhi

PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

shivendrashukla wrote:
MiG 25 cannot be used as an interceptor. The damn thing takes like a 100km diameter to make a full 360 turn. The one based at KKD was on lease, not with IAF.

...and add to it the low altitude troubles with the engine. The `Foxbat' can barely maintain supersonic speed at low altitudes. Second, the Kalaikonda lease sounds interesting - do you have more on this, Shivendra? The IAF ones were based in Bareilly, but didn't they go places at times?
Cheers, Sumantra.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
747-237
Member


Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 10968
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sabya99 wrote:
American troops landed in Dum Dum airport ( November 1962 ) and China withdrew. Last thing they wanted to see was Indian army under US air cover.




_________________
10000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@747-237, this is a very appropriate picture. Most of the younger generations have forgotten those dark days. My late uncle used to work for DGOF and had the priviledge to see C130 landing in DumDum airport in those day. Again thanks for posting.
_________________
Sabya99


Last edited by sabya99 on Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:13 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aseem
Member


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2840
Location: YYZ

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looking from political angle, I think it was just too much for Nehru to ask for American help. Non-alignment was after all his baby.

VT-ASJ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aseem wrote:
Looking from political angle, I think it was just too much for Nehru to ask for American help. Non-alignment was after all his baby.

VT-ASJ

Mr.Nehru had no problem to contact JFK , one of the most pro India President this country ever had. Help came in with instant result. Rest is history.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shivendrashukla
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 1354
Location: Mumbai, India

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Although the result of American help is debatable, what I have read and have been told is that the Chinese withdrew because of logistical problems. They were unable to get their supplies through during the winter months. Once they realised this, they quickly withdrew.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aseem
Member


Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2840
Location: YYZ

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

shivendrashukla wrote:
Although the result of American help is debatable, what I have read and have been told is that the Chinese withdrew because of logistical problems. They were unable to get their supplies through during the winter months. Once they realised this, they quickly withdrew.


I guess that's what they have been doing ever since. Building rail and road network to Tibet. In today's times, attacking India without all weather road/rail to Tibet looks laughable.

VT-ASJ
_________________
[url=http://openflights.org/user/aseemsjohri]
[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ex-IAF chief Tipnis blames Nehru for 1962 defeat
New Delhi, Nov 20, 2012 (PTI)

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/293206/ex-iaf-chief-tipnis-blames.html

A former IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal (retd) A Y Tipnis has sought to blame former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru for India's defeat in the 1962 war with China, amid a continuing debate on why air power was not used during the conflict.

Speaking at a seminar 'India and China: After five decades of 1962 war' here, Tipnis also alleged that Nehru had surrendered national security interests to realise his "ambition" to be a world leader.

"It was more or less universally accepted perhaps grudgingly not openly in some Indian quarters that to serve the dubious purpose of political survival that Pandit Nehru with his grandiose vision of a conflict free non-alligned world surrendered vital national security interest to the ambition of being a world leader," he said.

The remarks made yesterday came against the backdrop of the recent comments by the current Indian Air Force Chief Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne that the outcome of the 1962 war with China would have been different had the IAF been used in an offensive role.

Asked to expand on his remarks, Tipnis today said Nehru was the "major contributor" for India's debacle.

72-year-old Tipnis, who had a three-year tenure as IAF Chief from December 31, 1998 was commissioned as a fighter pilot in 1960, two years before the hostilities broke out between India and China.

Tipnis said he had also seen an Army Chief in those days being "ticked off" like a school-boy by Prime Minister Nehru for his alleged petulance.

The issue of IAF not being used in the 1962 hostilities is still debated by military historians and experts and there is no clarity as to why the air force was not used.

Browne had said the IAF was not allowed to be used in an offensive role and confined only to provide transport support to the Army. "These are open and glaring lessons we should have imbibed," he added.

For the first time in last 50 years, India celebrated the anniversary of the 1962 war with China on October 20 where Defence Minister A K Antony along with the three Services chiefs laid wreaths on the Amar Jawan Jyoti to pay tributes to the martyrs and participants of the war.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sabya99
Member


Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 1399
Location: New Jersey/CCU

PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2013 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nehru permitted CIA spy planes to use Indian air base

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/nehru-permitted-cia-spy-planes-to-use-indian-air-base/article5028660.ece

India allowed the U.S. to use one of its air bases for refuelling the CIA’s U-2 spy planes to target Chinese territories after its defeat in the 1962 war, a declassified official document said on Friday.
The then Indian Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru approved overflight by U-2 missions covering the border areas with China on November 11, 1962, the independent National Security Archive (NSA) said in a report based on the latest set of declassified documents it obtained from the CIA under the Freedom of Information Act.
The use of Charbatia, an abandoned World War-II base in Orissa, was agreed during a meeting between the then US President John F Kennedy and Indian President S Radhakrishnan on June 3, 1963, but Indian work to improve it took longer than expected, so the missions resumed from Thailand’s Takhli, NSA said, based on the 400-page CIA report released by it.
According to the report, which details the spying programmes conducted with the planes from 1954 to 1974, the U-2 mission on 10 November 1963 was the longest yet flown by a U-2 at 11 hours 45 minutes, and the pilot was so exhausted that project managers limited future flights to 10 hours endurance.
comments: Kennedy era was symbol of very good Indo-US defence collaboration. I am not surprised by it.
_________________
Sabya99
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Goat
Member


Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 3257
Location: South of France

PostPosted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have paraphrased this from a post made in Outlook magazine by a certain chap that calls himself FEDUP INDIAN. I am mostly in agreement.

Nehru's 'contributions' to modern India.

1. In 1948, when Pakistani tribals invaded Kashmir, the Indian Army swung into action and repulsed them. The Army had almost completed the task when Nehru declared a unilateral cease fire, and ran off to the UN to internationalize the issue. Even the Pakistanis couldn't believe their good fortune.

2. Even at the end of the 1940s, leaders like Vallabhai Patel warned Nehru that the Chinese could not be trusted. Nehru threw all caution to the winds and engaged with his 'Hindi Chini bhai bhai' rubbish, waltzing with Chou En Lai in Bandung. In return for all this kindness, the Chinese gave Nehru and India a royal kick up the backside in 1962.

3. It was Nehru who started this disgusting 'Nati Poti' dynastic rule. He appointed his sister, Vijayalaxmi Pandit , as India's first ambassador to the UN. He gave his inexperienced daughter, Indira Gandhi, a leading position in the Congress party, promoting her above other senior and more capable leaders.

4. Nehru packed the diplomatic services with either his close friends like Krishna Menon, or his Kashmiri Brahmin mates like T.N.Kaul. Most of these sychophants were incompetent to the core, and massively damaged India's reputation abroad .

5. The license-permit raj, which bled India's economy for more than 40 years, was entirely a creation of Nehru and the other socialist losers around him.

6. In the 1950s, the US offered India a permanent seat in the UN Security council, asking in return that India would have to join a military alliance against the USSR. The socialist Nehru in his infinite wisdom, refused the offer and the seat went to the Chinese. Today, India is seeking the same seat with a begging bowl, only to be vetoed by China every time.

In any country worth its salt, a person who screwed up the economy, lost a war, created a never-ending war like situation with a neighboring state and appointed incompetents in positions of responsibility would have been publicly castigated, and shown as a wrong example. In India, such people are hailed as 'great leaders'.

Mera Bharat Mahaan!
_________________
I don't know which is the more pampered bunch : AI's widebodies (the aunties) or Jet's widebodies (the planes).
-Jasepl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
747-237
Member


Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 10968
Location: Gordon Gekko's Boardroom

PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A follow up picture, to my last post above ^.


_________________
10000 posts (and counting) on Airliners-India.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Airliners-India Forum Index -> Military Aviation & Space All times are GMT + 5.5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. Hosted by phpBB.BizHat.com