The Indian Air Force has evolved from being a small tactical air force to one that can allegedly hold its own against any imminent threat over its 90 years of existence.
The 170,000-strong force has inducted a range of modern aircraft, including domestically-developed LCA Tejas, French Rafale, Russian Sukhoi, and Mig-29, among others.
Addressing a press conference on Friday, a day ahead of Indian Air Force Day, IAF Chief Air Marshal V.R. Chaudhari stated that for him, "this journey has been characterized most by the toil, ingenuity, and sagacity of our predecessors who had the ability to think beyond the resources available to them.”
"Each incremental change made over the years by the veterans has permitted us to stand on the pedestal that is rightfully ours today," he added.
Recalling the initial years of the force, which faced three wars between 1962 and 1971, Vijainder Kumar Thakur, former squadron leader of the Indian Air Force, told Sputnik that in the 1962 conflict with China, the IAF was trained to play a decisive role.
Military documents show that the IAF possessed over 200 transport and 550 combat aircraft in 1960. Chinese forces had 500-600 IL-28 bombers and around 1500 MiG jets. However, then-Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru did not allow the combat arm of the IAF to carry out operations during the Sino-Indian war.
“It was held back by our political leadership out of fear of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force, which, ironically, was neither well-equipped nor well-trained for mountain warfare,” Thakur reckoned.
Several documents and studies indicated a range of factors behind Nehru’s decision, which include the analysis of Director of the Intelligence Bureau B.N. Mullick, who concluded that Chinese bombers would bomb Indian cities in response to IAF combat.
However, it was later found that the political leadership did not consult air force chiefs during the war.
George K. Tanham, a US artillery officer in the Second World War, who later became a strategic analyst, wrote that the IAF leadership was quite confident about using combat aircraft to its own advantage.
“It is a fact that Canberras flew 22 photographic reconnaissance missions between Oct. 13 and Nov. 11, 1962, during the conflict period, over Aksai Chin, Towang, Se la and Walong area. Some of the sorties were at 300 feet above Chinese concentrations. No damage to the Canberras from Chinese anti-aircraft artillery was the proof showing the poor level of Chinese capabilities,” Tanham wrote in a study on IAF for RAND Corporation.
Indo-Pakistan Wars
During the 1965 war with Pakistan, the IAF was reasonably well-equipped and rose to the challenge posed by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF), keeping the latter in check. Official records suggest that the IAF had 466 combat aircraft against the PAF’s 203 on the eve of the conflict.
The Indian Air Force deployed 176 aircraft in the east to take care of the threat emanating from China and Pakistan.
During the 1965 war, the IAF used MiG-21, Gnat, Hunter, Mystere, Vampire, Canberra, Packet, Dakota and Auster planes, while the Pakistan Air Force was fighting with Sabre, Canberra and F-104s, among others.
“However, overall, the IAF's participation in the war was desultory and mostly reactive. IAF leadership did not display the aggression needed to decisively affect the course of the war,” the IAF veteran observed.
George K. Tanham also questioned the strategy adopted by the then-IAF leadership.
“It is not clear why the IAF decided to withhold nearly half of its air force against possible Chinese attack since one advantage of air power is its ability to move quickly,” he wrote in a study on the IAF for the Rand Corporation.
During the 1971 war with Pakistan, the IAF performance was creditable but once again it didn't play a decisive role due to not being well-equipped for an attack role.
“In all the conflicts that the IAF has participated in, it participated actively. But it didn't decisively alter the course of the war because of a defensive mindset of the leadership and because it was equipped with whatever aircraft we could get, not with a specific capability in mind,” Thakur explained.
Highlighting the experience of the 1998 Kargil operations against Pakistan, Thakur said that the IAF was "mostly caught with its pants down".
“It was neither well-equipped nor well-trained for close air support missions in high mountains. Considering that the Line of Control runs entirely through mountainous terrain, there is no justification for the IAF's lack of preparedness,” he added.
Threat of Two-Front War and Preparedness
The IAF is down to 31 fighter jet squadrons against a sanctioned strength of 42.
On Friday, IAF Air Chief Marshal VR Chaudhari stated that the force is committed to domestically producing Tejas MK-II and fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) today.
“With the given numbers (31 squadrons), it will be impossible to keep watch and do combat air patrol all across the country,” the IAF chief underlined.
India is facing threats from two fronts from China and Pakistan on account of border disputes.
“As such, protracted low-intensity conflicts along disputed borders are more likely than all-out wars,” former squadron leader Thakur reckoned.
He advised the IAF to focus more on border conflicts and less on projecting power across oceans or undertaking expeditionary operations.
“We need to acquire aircraft and weapon systems that can play a decisive role in border conflicts such as drones for surveillance, targeting, networking and attack; cruise missiles, and precision-guided munition (PGM),” Thakur stated.
Earlier this week, the IAF inducted a domestically developed and manufactured Light Combat Helicopter named Prachanda. The combat helicopter has a crucial role in border conflicts - for special operations, combat, transportation, medevac and logistics.
Thakur suggested that "the IAF needs to strengthen its helicopter fleet and acquire indigenously developed sensors, short and long-range strike weapons for helicopters”.
The IAF veteran also urged the IAF to reconsider its doctrinal focus on medium-altitude operations with PGMs. “Both Ukraine & Russia are heavily reliant on low-level penetration and attack. An indigenously developed Jaguar replacement may not be a bad idea,” he concluded.