Sankalan Chattopadhyay Profile picture
May 12 15 tweets 3 min read Read on X
A little serious post today.

In a short thread I'll try to explain in layman's terms why "Operation Sindoor" is nothing less than a marvel. It was India's first major introduction to the 21st century advanced warfare on a massive scale. And India triumphs with flying colours.
Making fun of the failure of Pakistan and the shabby performance of Chinese & Turkish platforms is one thing. But, Pakistan is really, really a strong adversary. A "near-peer" enemy in many fields. And exactly why, it needed grit & determination to outwit a powerful enemy.
Their military (terrorists in uniform) and terrorist (mercenaries) facilities were under protection of a densely arranged integrated air defence system consisting of cutting edge Chinese AD systems. These systems are presumed to have good detection and tracking.
Other than radars for various purposes Pakistan has good EW and AEW&C systems as well. Besides, they were being fed sat intel by friendly nations too. In short, Pakistan potentially has the capability to track any movement of the Indian Armed Forces and respond within minutes.
Yet, the #IAF conducted back-to-back two high risk operations successfully. Not only were the terrorist camps destroyed, but around a dozen of the PAF bases were decimated, AD systems rendered ineffective, assets were charred and military infrastructures were dusted to ground.
Was there any loss to the Indian side?

Details haven't been released yet officially by the MoD. But even the enemy doesn't claim a huge number either. While, there's no clear evidence of the IAF losses, it's minimum nevertheless and for such a high risk ops it's negligible.
It has been clearly stated that all pilots are safe and back home. This is the most important thing. One or two pieces of equipment, for debate if lost, can be replaced by a financially strong nation, but a trained pilot is an asset. And they are safe.
And they are back home after conducting at least two high risk missions defying the best weapons Pakistan has! This is not possible without having the best of the best on your side. IAF has showcased what they can do! And it has been done without any fgfa.
No other airforce in the world has demonstrated (till now) such a dominating capability against a near-peer adversary, in the 21st Century. Undoubtedly, some other airforce are also capable of but they are yet (may God forbid, let there be piece) to prove.
Yes, Russia-Ukraine could be another example. But, in that conflict neither side has established air superiority in such a calibre that the other side loses offensive capabilities. In the case of India, the IAF neutralized the counter attack capacity of a nuclear armed state!
And this is what makes the IAF the sole such example. The #IndianArmy and the IAF also neutralized all impending attacks by Pakistan. It is also a wonder that India stood against waves of swarm attacks and neutralized most of them. Not only that, India took down missiles as well.
And when India counter attacked with its own stand-off weapons, missiles, drones, hardly Pakistan could withstand. And remember, many of our offensive and defensive platforms are indigenous in nature. This speaks for the self-reliance and quality of the indigenous prowess.
The #IndianNavy forced the entire Pak naval and air assets to be confined to the narrow Makran coastal area. In one word, the tri-service in a coordinated manner, made a mockery of the offensive and defensive capability of a nuclear armed enemy, that too in a quick notice.
This is why, losing most of the defensive & offensive capabilities, with a burden of huge financial loss, Pakistan was forced to request for an immediate ceasefire.
In the end, I convey my gratitude to the Indian scientists and the Indian Armed Forces for their sacrifice, valour and contribution.

Yes, IMPOSSIBLE IS THE THING INDIA DOES THE BEST.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sankalan Chattopadhyay

Sankalan Chattopadhyay Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @VinodDX9

Apr 4
Let's talk about the recent FICV concepts we witnessed during the metal cutting ceremony of AAP-Wh & Tr. We will discuss only what we can reduce from those photos only. So, first let's look at the early FICV concept released by TASL. This is important to explain the new concepts. Image
The FICV was based on the WhAP but the hull was modified accordingly. You can identify the opposite position of the engine & driver in two platforms. Movements of the tracks would provide water jets. However, both have the same 30mm turret with 2×ATGM, co-ax MG, LWS & optics. Image
Image
But later the turret design got changed. You can identify the newer concept is different to the earlier turret concept (in the fourth picture). Yet the hull remains the same which is based on the WhAP, but yes, as said earlier, with some necessary modifications. Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 14 tweets
Feb 7
Stryker thread- origin, requirements, and concerns in Indian context

First, what's our requirement?

The only released RFI is for 198 AFV for the Recce & Support role
Transportability: Il-76 & C-17
Must be amphibious
Engine: minimum 25Hp/T Image
Image
Image
Image
While it was almost certain that one of the four Indian companies, engaged in 8×8 AFV projects, would be selected. But then came the bolt from the blue. According to the reports, the total requirement is of 530 and army eyes Stryker as the preference!

theprint.in/defence/india-…Image
But what is Stryker?

Everything started back in the 1990s when GMD offered a variant of Swiss MOWAG Piranha IIIH to Canada. The Canadian variant came to be known as LAV III. GMD offered this to the US Army under the IAC program. That American variant was named Stryker. Image
Image
Image
Read 26 tweets
Nov 18, 2024
History of Arjun tank development- long thread

The first GSQR for an Indian Main Battle Tank dates back to the late 1950s, which couldn’t be materialised, and the Indian Army ended with the procurement of the Centurion, Vickers Mk. 1, and T-54 in the coming decades.
However, one might be surprised to find none of the tanks then, with services, could meet all the requirements of the original GSQR. After the 1971 war, the army decided to go full throttle with the design, development and manufacture of an indigenous design.
The first GSQR No. 326 was issued in 1972. The project for design and development was sanctioned in May 1974 and project was taken up by the CVRDE. The PDC of the project was envisaged for 10 years. Thus, it was hoped that the MBT would be ready for induction by 1985.
Read 32 tweets
Jan 13, 2024
Unlike the UAV which anyhow can be put into services, the Stryker is rather a much complex thing. Here's a thread, if you don't mind a long one.

First, what's our requirement?
198 AFV for Recce & Support
Transportability: Il-76 & C-17
Must be amphibious
Engine: minimum 25hp/T Image
While at least four indigenous designs (TAS, L&T, MDSL & KSSL) will compete, reportedly Stryker is also offered to India. And here comes the question, what variant actually will be pitched?

During the visit of CDS Gen Bipin Rawat, Stryker ICV-D and ICVVA1-S were showcased. Image
What's the ICV-D?

It's the FBH (Flat Bottom Hull) variant also designated M1296. It's a 19T platform, the lightest such variant. Thus it can be put into C-130 as well! It's equipped with Kongsberg RT40 turret (MCT-30) with XM813 30mm gun. It's powered by Cat 3126 engine (350hp). Image
Read 19 tweets
Aug 14, 2022
India's Cancelled Fighter Jet Programs - which could change the course of future

Ground Attack Fighter-I (1965)

Transonic, two engine platform to be powered by M.45, short range strike platform..but soon there was requirement of better capability
Ground Attack Fighter -II (1966)

It was to be powered by two R.11F-300, supersonic platform with air-to-air defence as well. Ordnance carriage on eight under wing stations as well as internal bay! However, lack of necessary infrastructure led an alternative.
HF-24 Mk. 1R

Feasible alternative to GAF-II, powered by R.11 it was to be a medium range platform offered to be in services by 1976. But it didn't see any future, instead requirements led to ASA.
Read 7 tweets
Jul 3, 2022
Procurement of armoured vehicles by the Indian Armed Forces

#IndianArmy 1300 MDSL Armoured Light Specialist Vehicle (Rs. 1056 cr). to be equipped with MMG, AGL, ATGM

4.75T GVW category
1T payload (400 kg cargo)
215 hp engine
D+3P/D+5P
STANAG I/II

pib.gov.in/PressReleasePa…
#IndianArmy 27 BF M4 (Rs. 177.95 cr)

GVW: 16T
Payload: 2.7T
Crew: 2+8
Engine: 450hp
STANAG III

google.co.in/amp/s/theprint…
#IAF Ashok Leyland Light Specialist Vehicle

GVW: 8T max
Payload: 1T
Crew: 2+2
Engine: 180 hp

auto.hindustantimes.com/auto/news/asho…
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(