Originally posted by Daedalus3
Stellar,

I perceive that you are taking the discussion to a nuclear perspective. Russia may consider 'conventional' whatever it likes, but my pessimistic opinion of its use of such weapons remains.

Ok.

IMHO everything is not ICBMs(I doubt Russia would need to use those against China anyways;IRBMs would suffice) and nukes and biochem warfare; even if we're talking about Russia.

Probably true...

as for battle readiness and training; I've learnt that such distinctions are only evident beforehand in microscpic spec ops like scenarios. I prefer to refrain from making such comparisions anymore.

And that's probably something i should also refrain from doing.

For e.g: I genuinely feel from my personal experience, that Soviet flight combat tactics and engagement are quite lifeless and predictable.

Which personal experiences?

[quyote]Infact I believe that the major losses faced by Russia supplied AFs in the MiddleEast have partly been due to blind application of Soviet flight combat tactics.

They did not apply Soviet tactics ....

Western(US,British and French) flight combat tactics IMHO are far more innovative and effective. I speak of this from a very local perspective as well.

Why is it innovative and when did we have a chance to see it in action?

Over the last few decades our CAW(and other institutions) have built a new flight combat doctrine after examining these 'shortcomings'.
This is pivotal I believe in the out-of-ordinary performance shown by IAF
pilots using Russian jets against western flight combat tactics, as compared to the performance of Russian jets (in the hands of other 3rd party operators) against western tactics.

But the Indian air force is large and gained good experience by fighting Pakistan; i just do not see that we can learn much from situations where the massively more numerous USAF smashes third world nations into oblivion.

Now I don't know what regime the Chinese pilots train but my point is:All this is again perspective in the end. Not worth talking about IMO.

Probably right...

As for the microscopic differences between chinese and russian policies:Well I could list them, true, but I doubt that would get us anywhere.

Not if your going to presume that i can't and wont change my mind with new information!

Lets just say that the best at actively observing these differences would be countries that have vested interests in this Sino-Russian 'partnership' ( And the US/west is not one of those countries ).

India is as far as i am concerned formally allied with Russian and China....

Secondly I do not believe that China is a client state of Russia. I'm not sure if you could prove it otherwise as well, but I'm willing to listen
I am certain that China does not view itself as the same.

Chinese citizens might not but i am quote confident that the Chinese government knows their place and knows from prior experience what will happen if they stepped out of line; Tangshan was not just bad luck.

As for the Ussuri River Conflict:
Well, the Soviets never let it get out-of-hand due to other global commitments such as czechslovakia and the initiation of SALT.

The Soviet have consistently controlled and directed disarmament talks and implementation and they were in my opinion well in control of world events by that time with the Chinese trying to upset the balance at the behest of Wall Street....

However the chinese offensive had a far-reaching ideological accusation on the Soviets:

The Soviet form of communism is inherently flawed and thus they are unfit to hold the leadership of this position.Our(Chinese) communism is supreme and we(chinese) consider ourselves to be the new bearers of this torch

I try not to waste time on ideologues, or the ideologies they pretend to believe, in as i have found that while they do profess great motives they on the whole do whatever they wish in typical self interested fashion. Communism in Russia may have been a grand social experiment but one brought about my agents in US financial circles and not some express desire of the Russian people; it's much the same for China and frankly i don't buy into the hype surrounding any systems that must maintain itself by state terror and suppression.

Such an accusation coupled with knowledge of chinese human-waving warfare in the not so distant Korean War, made the soviets seriously consider the tactical nuclear option if the skirmish inflammed into a war.

Quite possibly and at that time the Chinese could have thrown a serious spanner in the wheels of Soviet machine with the US and others eventually moving in to collect the spoils.

This assurance was extended to the Indian allies during the fag-end of the 1971 Bangladesh war. The evident,synchronised and overt actions of the Kissingerated-US and China in support of Pakistan against India had forced the Soviets to :

As far as my knowledge goes that's about right.

1. send a nuclear-capable naval fleet in order neutralise any misadventures by the 7th CSG
   
2. Deploy forward positions at the chinese border to prevent the chinese from massing at the Indian border.
   

Without going to check i can accept this as true...

Both gestures were 'nuke-driven' in order to ensure that the conflict between India and Pakistan remained just that; one between India and Pakistan.

As far as my knowledge goes the US national security state have since the second world war tried to escalate regional conflicts for imperial gain while the Soviet consistently tried to keep things under control as best possible..

Anyways, Lets leave all this aside Stellar.

I can rarely do that and especially not when the other person's views aligns closely enough with mine to warrant further inspection so as to see how i should adapt my views to include new information...

I have certain opinions about the Sino-chinese relationship and yes, they maybe driven from a lot of homegrown info; but tend to agree with this info for the most part. Explaining it might be difficult

Sorry for being a bit 'kurt' in this response but i do want to keep this discussion going despite being quite overwhelmed with waiting responses.

Whatever you type i will read and i will get to source material if it does not take more than a few hours.

Sorry for rush job.

Stellar

Hey Stellar.. will get back to you with some notes on where im basing my statements from.
Might not be so easily available online but nonetheless will hunt for something.
The areas of concern are I believe:

1. Soviet Flight Combat Tactics in general
   
2. Application of the same in ME AFs
   
3. Shortcomings of the same in the ME
   
4. InAF experience with both western and Soviet air combat doctrines. As such why they have chosen a meld and not VVS/PVO regimes.
   
5. A bit of insight into the PAF and where they fit into my explanation
   

Soviet Flight Combat Tactics in general

Deadalus3, look into Soviet tactics during WWII, and then approach from the larger perspective of massive Soviet airspace and numbers of aircraft involved.

Given Soviet/Russian geography, the lineage of aircraft development did not change but consistently evolved in the environment of fierce competition between design teams.

MiG-3 – MiG31
Yak – MiG29
La- Su27
IL2 – SU25
Pe2 – SU24/34

InAF experience with both western and Soviet air combat doctrines. As such why they have chosen a meld and not VVS/PVO regimes.

Same as above, Soviet tactics evolved from extensive experience in WWII.

Iskander,
Agreed, but I'm talking about the relevance of these tactics in today's(1960s - todate )scenarios, esp in the ME wars.

StellarX, could you do me a favour, I've been real busy off late so digging up info on this online might not be something that I maybe able to do soon enough.

If you'd like, you can research the number of Soviet flight school instrcutors these ME countries had between the 60s till the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Maybe look for articles, comments, opinions revolving around these instructors and the training they imparted... information on how this played out in the 3 Iasraeli wars and the 8 year Iran-Iraq War.
Leave out the two gulf wars if you'd like; i agree that those wars are not good indicators of operational tactics due to the imbalance in numbers.

Simultaneously try to look for inputs from IAF and PAF instructors who served alongside these soviet instructors in the same capacity.
You should find a lot of info on what I am trying to say.
Let me know if you come up with anything.

Originally posted by Daedalus3
StellarX, could you do me a favour, I've been real busy off late so digging up info on this online might not be something that I maybe able to do soon enough.

Sorry for being 'kurt' again but i simply lack the time to try make your case for you. As always i will do my best to impartially consider whatever you present in due time.

Thanks

Stellar

Originally posted by Devastator7
Russian Boy, he said himself he wasn't being nationalistic but factual. Which is fair to say because the PAK-FA and the Su-47 are both (in my opinion) disinfo from Putin about what he has and is developing. The F-22 has demolished the simulated Su-37's during tests.

Now what's the Su-37, Su-47 and the PAK-FA? What do they have in common. Can you give some insight on this simulated kill?
Are you talking about the Raptor participation in recently held Red Flags?