What the Indian Air Force ought to do if Narendra Modi had a Spine

[Signalian]

You are correct but in this thread we were not discussing war strategy. If you want, we could certainly discuss that, let me put war strategist hat on.

Just like Ukraine shifted the domain of war towards drones and made life hell for russian forces, a war strategist would have done the same in this thread.

War strategy is part of IAF discussion and relevant to the thread. It isn't separate.
There are so many points like.

Multi-Domain Operations including Cyber and Electronic Warfare (EW)as well as Network-Centric Warfare (NCW).
Then Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) drones communicating with pilots in mid-air.
IAF Air Chief Marshal A.P. Singh noted that the IAF requires an influx of 36 to 40 new fighter jets annually (roughly two full squadrons per year) just to halt the decline, which is difficult to reach.
Then the gap between the IAF's 29 operational fighter squadrons and its sanctioned mandate of 42 creates a functional deficit of approximately 200 to 250 combat aircraft. This makes fighting a conventional two-front war against China and Pakistan simultaneously difficult using a traditional symmetric approach.

and so much more.

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

Successful testing and certification of the GTRE-built Kaveri Dry Engine is a much bigger achievement than AMCA. BrahMos Aerospace is developing the afterburner for the same engine, which will take another 5–6 years. Even with the Kaveri Dry Engine, India is now the 6th country, after the US, Russia, France, the UK and China, to develop such engines.

Eight prototypes of the Kaveri Dry Engine have been delivered by Godrej Aerospace. The Kaveri engine programme started in 1980, when DRDO was the only organisation in India with the capability to work on such projects. But today, DRDO, HAL, GTRE, BrahMos Aerospace and even private companies like Godrej Aerospace can develop such engines. HAL has developed a 40 kN turbofan engine, the HTFE-25/40, using its own internal funding.

What comes next in terms of engine development for the Tejas Mk2 and AMCA remains to be seen. However, the day the Tejas Mk1 flies with the Kaveri afterburning engine and the GHATAK UCAV flies with the Kaveri Dry Engine will be a historic achievement. It may not receive as much media attention as the first flight of AMCA, but those who understand fighter jet aviation know that developing these engines is a much bigger achievement than developing the fighter jets themselves.

This is something Pakistan should have done long time ago. We are still struggling with setting up advance R&D for engine, Radar, BVR facilities.
AZM was shelved or at least part of it, PFX is still active but no New significant information in last 12 months.

Just like Ukraine shifted the domain of war towards drones and made life hell for russian forces, a war strategist would have done the same in this thread.

War strategy is part of IAF discussion and relevant to the thread. It isn't separate.
There are so many points like.

Multi-Domain Operations including Cyber and Electronic Warfare (EW)as well as Network-Centric Warfare (NCW).
Then Manned-Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) drones communicating with pilots in mid-air.
IAF Air Chief Marshal A.P. Singh noted that the IAF requires an influx of 36 to 40 new fighter jets annually (roughly two full squadrons per year) just to halt the decline, which is difficult to reach.
Then the gap between the IAF's 29 operational fighter squadrons and its sanctioned mandate of 42 creates a functional deficit of approximately 200 to 250 combat aircraft. This makes fighting a conventional two-front war against China and Pakistan simultaneously difficult using a traditional symmetric approach.

and so much more.

War strategy is definitely part of the discussion.

Then again, if every IAF thread has to cover MDO, EW, NCW, MUM-T, drones, cyber, space, logistics, and force structure, we're no longer discussing the IAF.

We're accidentally writing the next national defence doctrine.

Sure, we can discuss it but there should be dedicated thread for it.

 

[RescueRanger]

People like this don't have much credibility. Time and again, their claims have been challenged, debunked, or corrected, yet they continue to present speculation as serious analysis. Unfortunately, we're living in an era where having a camera, a YouTube channel, and spare time is enough for some people to label themselves "defense analysts."
Real analysts rely on facts, evidence, research, and years of subject-matter expertise. Too many others are simply repackaging information they found elsewhere and presenting it as original insight.
Channels such as Defence Outpost, AM Raad, and International Defence Analysis often add little in terms of genuine expertise or independent research. Much of their content feels like a copy-and-paste exercise dressed up as analysis. The same applies to Global Time Pakistan, whose content frequently revolves around reposting or commenting on Pravin Sawhney's videos. At some point, it starts to look less like analysis and more like a content strategy built around someone else's work.

What kind of "think tank" can't format their paragraphs?

The CTRL+C, CTRL+V kind...

Please stop this AI slop!