Nobody would be dumb enough to attack an enemy's nuclear arsenal with conventional weapons. Basically you're forcing your opponent to either use their nuclear weapons or lose them. And only someone who has already given up will choose to lose them. So the game theory says that if you're already escalating to nuclear exchange, you might as well use nuclear weapons to make sure the enemy arsenal is properly knocked out.
Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Nuclear weapons are not designed specifically for destroying deeply hardened bunkers. Bunker-buster munitions are a specialized type of ammunition designed to penetrate reinforced underground structures before detonating. They are typically very large and heavy, making them difficult or impossible for most fighter jets to carry. This is where strategic bombers become important, as they are designed to carry and deliver such heavy munitions over long distances.
They just are. And targets that won't be vulnerable to bunker-busting nukes are far beyond anything possible in conventional format.
Conventional bunker busters of all kinds are needed when you don't want to use nuclear weapons(effectively never).
But this doesn't touch on subject where India wants to even begin with a strategic bomber.
The only remote possibility is izd. 80, but I'll be very, very surprised if it's for sale - even to India.
B-52H bombers in USAF service are powered by 8 P&W TF33 turbofans — each generating ~76 kN of thrust — for a total of ~608 kN of thrust.
In other words, an equivalent Indian strategic bomber would need to be equipped with 12 non-afterburning Kaveri turbofans — maybe 10 such turbofans if HAL and DRDO can deliver an especially efficient design — to be comparable to the iconic B-52H, especially in terms of payload.
Absolutely no doubt Bharat is totally capable of engineering and manufacturing such a 10 or 12 engine beast, and most certainly in VLO flying wing format in alignment with the times!
Anyhow, just what are you smoking, @Anhad? Can I please have some too?!
Kaveri is an engine with a bad poor thrust-to-weight ratio; even the Tejas 1 abandoned its adaptation.
Removing the afterburner to make it a drone engine is essentially recycling waste, but whether India can currently design and produce such a model remains questionable.
Developing high-bypass turbofan engines is far more difficult than developing low- or medium-bypass turbofan engines. Given that the Kaveri itself is still a long way off, developing a bomber engine from it is pure fantasy.
But from an Indian perspective, I still believe they should persist in completing the Kaveri.
The key is execution, cultivating an ecosystem. This requires procuring the necessary tools, training the necessary engineers, and establishing the appropriate organizations. A poor first version is acceptable. WS-10 started poorly, but you can revise it to a second or third version, introducing new designs and materials. The most important thing is maintaining the operating ecosystem.
But they won't.
Removing the afterburner to make it a drone engine is essentially recycling waste, but whether India can currently design and produce such a model remains questionable.
Developing high-bypass turbofan engines is far more difficult than developing low- or medium-bypass turbofan engines. Given that the Kaveri itself is still a long way off, developing a bomber engine from it is pure fantasy.
But from an Indian perspective, I still believe they should persist in completing the Kaveri.
The key is execution, cultivating an ecosystem. This requires procuring the necessary tools, training the necessary engineers, and establishing the appropriate organizations. A poor first version is acceptable. WS-10 started poorly, but you can revise it to a second or third version, introducing new designs and materials. The most important thing is maintaining the operating ecosystem.
But they won't.
Last edited:
What's the point of discussing stealth strategic unmanned bombers entering Pakistani airspace, when the current state of affairs is kaveri being ~dead, HAL - struggling to deliver light interceptors, IAF - pushed away from LOC by PAF, resorting to massive use of stand off munitions instead.
Heaviest sutable aircraft for IAF for the coming decade(s) are 222th squadron MKIs, which can lift ~2.5t payload (maybe 3.5t, if reinforcement is similar to Su-34) on their central station. These are highly valuable/irreplaceable strategic assets.
Heaviest sutable aircraft for IAF for the coming decade(s) are 222th squadron MKIs, which can lift ~2.5t payload (maybe 3.5t, if reinforcement is similar to Su-34) on their central station. These are highly valuable/irreplaceable strategic assets.
no point sounding smart if you all cant detect a shill in the first place
this keeps happening and the same people keep taking the bait every time
this keeps happening and the same people keep taking the bait every time
I mean there's a lot of "we want"s and "we should have"s but evidently decision-makers aren't doing what they should be to get all these "game changers" or whatever that means. In case you want to argue otherwise they let Kaveri be such a failure