As Navy Advances S5 Subs and Army Deploys Agni-V, IAF's Lack of Stealth Bombers Emerges as Weakest Link in India's Nuclear Triad

As Navy Advances S5 Subs and Army Deploys Agni-V, IAF's Lack of Stealth Bombers Emerges as Weakest Link in India's Nuclear Triad


India is taking significant strides to modernise its nuclear triad, the three-pronged capability to launch nuclear weapons from land, sea, and air that forms the bedrock of its strategic defence.

While the sea and land-based legs of this triad are being fortified with advanced submarines and missiles, the air component, managed by the Indian Air Force (IAF), faces a growing capability gap, raising concerns about its effectiveness in a high-threat environment.

The principle of a nuclear triad is to guarantee a nation's ability to retaliate against a nuclear attack, a concept known as a "credible second-strike capability."

This is central to India's "No First Use" policy, which pledges that India will only use nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear attack on its territory or forces. A robust and survivable triad ensures this deterrent is believable.

Sea and Land Legs: A Picture of Strength​

The Indian Navy is on track to significantly enhance the sea-based arm of the triad with the development of the S5-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs).

These submarines, expected to displace around 13,500 tonnes, represent a major leap over the current Arihant-class vessels. The S5 submarines will be powered by a 190 MW pressurized light-water reactor and are designed to be exceptionally quiet, making them difficult to detect.

Crucially, they will carry long-range Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs), such as the K-5 (5,000 km range) and the developmental K-6 (reportedly 8,000 km range), which are capable of carrying multiple warheads.

The extended range of these missiles will allow the submarines to patrol securely in the Indian Ocean while holding targets deep within adversary territory, ensuring a guaranteed retaliatory strike capability.

The first S5 submarine is expected to enter production by 2027 and join the fleet in the mid-2030s.

On land, the Strategic Forces Command has bolstered its capabilities with the deployment of the Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). This solid-fuelled, road-mobile missile has a range of over 7,000 km.

In a major technological advancement, India successfully tested the Agni-V in March 2024 with Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) technology. This allows a single missile to carry several warheads, each capable of striking a different target, thereby overwhelming enemy missile defence systems.

Indian Air Force: A Gap in Aerial Deterrence​

In sharp contrast, the air-based leg of the triad relies on fighter aircraft that were not designed for penetrating modern, sophisticated air defence networks.

The IAF's nuclear delivery platforms include the French-made Rafale and Mirage-2000, the Russian Su-30 MKI, and the older Jaguar strike aircraft. While capable in their own right, none of these are stealth aircraft, meaning they have a large radar cross-section that makes them vulnerable to detection and interception.

Potential adversaries have deployed advanced surface-to-air missile systems like China's S-400 and HQ-9, and Pakistan's LY-80. These systems create multi-layered air defence bubbles that would be extremely hazardous for conventional fighters to penetrate.

To deliver a nuclear payload, these aircraft would have to rely on complex electronic warfare, flying at low levels, or using standoff cruise missiles like the 1,000-km range Nirbhay, which lack the reach and stealth of ballistic missiles.

The Compelling Case for a Stealth Bomber​

Military analysts argue that a dedicated stealth bomber is essential to close this gap.

Unlike fighter jets, a stealth bomber is specifically designed with a low-observable airframe, advanced avionics, and internal weapons bays to evade enemy radar. This would allow the IAF to conduct deep penetration strikes into heavily defended airspace with a higher probability of success.

A long-range stealth bomber, similar to the American B-21 Raider or the upcoming Chinese H-20, would offer several strategic advantages.

It could carry a significantly larger payload of conventional or nuclear weapons over intercontinental distances without refuelling. This provides strategic flexibility, allowing the aircraft to be used for signalling during a crisis, conventional strikes, or as a last-resort nuclear delivery platform, complementing the survivable sea-based deterrent.

The development of China’s own stealth bomber, the Xi'an H-20, adds urgency to the situation. The H-20 is projected to have a range of over 10,000 km and is expected to become operational within the next decade.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China's nuclear arsenal is also the fastest-growing in the world, projected to have increased its stockpile to 500 warheads in 2024, with Pakistan possessing around 170.

Without a comparable platform, India risks falling behind in the regional strategic balance.

While the cost of developing or acquiring a stealth bomber would be substantial, experts suggest that relying solely on missiles and submarines creates predictable dependencies.

A modernised air leg would introduce an element of unpredictability and ensure that India’s nuclear deterrent remains credible, flexible, and survivable from all three dimensions, thereby reinforcing its national security posture.
 
What you know is lacking is not weakness but laziness as weakness is seen by the enemy in military sphere, but what's seen and is not corrected is simply laziness or whatever. So if you need , you will get it .
 
I don't think stealth bombers are what India needs. Bombers have mostly been successfully used by USA, and all the countries USA used the bombers against had little to no air defence. In comparison, Pakistan may not have the best air defence, but they still have some. Bombers are huge investments, and losing one would be a huge loss 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️
 
Absolutely not! The IAF has little to no need for stealth bombers. Simply put, the operational need is debatable, and the cost is something we cannot and should not afford, given the IAF's present state.

Do not mix up the modernisation of the aerial nuclear deterrent with a perceived need for stealth bombers. What we need to do here is to move away from gravity drop nuclear bombs towards long-range missiles with nuclear warheads.

Perhaps something like a BrahMos-NG variant with a nuclear warhead would be a good idea. If not that, perhaps a RudraM-III variant with a nuclear warhead.
 
Bharat needs heavy long range bombers if it wants to dominate the IOR
No, we do not. What we need is a robust missile system that can deliver nukes if need be. Strategic bombers are neither an operational necessity nor a wise investment for us, atleast not for another decade or two.
 
As I have stated before, newer hypersonic cruise missiles and hypersonic glide vehicles are better than costly and redundant bombers.
 
No, we do not. What we need is a robust missile system that can deliver nukes if need be. Strategic bombers are neither an operational necessity nor a wise investment for us, atleast not for another decade or two.
We don’t need attack submarines then. If you think missiles will give you the accuracy of a stealth bomber then you’re nothing but a fool. US has tens of hundreds of long-range missiles, but they chose to bomb Iranian bases with B2.
 
A bomber can make use of specific bombs for specific situations, both in the neighbourhood or far beyond. A bomber can eliminate more places in one go, which a single missile cannot. Missile launching sites can be destroyed by the enemy, while a bomber in the air in its own airspace is less vulnerable.
 
We don’t need attack submarines then. If you think missiles will give you the accuracy of a stealth bomber then you’re nothing but a fool. US has tens of hundreds of long-range missiles, but they chose to bomb Iranian bases with B2.
The Americans sent in the B-2 for two reasons: To send a message that they can hit anywhere, and because using missiles would mean either using large numbers of cruiser missiles from a SSGN or other surface warships, or would require the US to fire ballistic missiles, which would be a significant step up on the escalation ladder.

The US' ability to hit anywhere has far more to do with its logistical train rather than the bombers themselves.

Oh, and two more things: Missiles can be extremely accurate, as we saw in Operation Sindoor. Secondly, you do realise that most bombers today are used as missile carriers, right? At that point, the bombers role is to only get the ordinance close to the target. The missile does the rest.
 
Absolutely not! The IAF has little to no need for stealth bombers. Simply put, the operational need is debatable, and the cost is something we cannot and should not afford, given the IAF's present state.

Do not mix up the modernisation of the aerial nuclear deterrent with a perceived need for stealth bombers. What we need to do here is to move away from gravity drop nuclear bombs towards long-range missiles with nuclear warheads.

Perhaps something like a BrahMos-NG variant with a nuclear warhead would be a good idea. If not that, perhaps a RudraM-III variant with a nuclear warhead.
We don't need stealth bomber but we do need a platform that can carry massive ordnance to finish off underground storage facility in Pakistan.
 
Agni V is being modified for that purpose only.
No, can't use ballistic missiles as they could trigger false nuclear alarm. Also, they are not suited for precision strike missions. We need a 3000+kg bomb that could be guided with precision and speed.
 
US won't give B-2 or B-21 to India better ADA+HAL+ Pvt sector put efforts to make Stealth Bomber ! Till then PAKDA ( Russia) armed with tactical nukes could be procured !
 
India needs bomber aircraft. Here, people are saying India doesn't have bombers. If we had bombers, we could launch five or six BrahMos missiles from a safe distance. See how much destruction it can cause. After Operation Sindoor, the world thought that Pakistan and India were the same. We have to break that myth. Su-30 can carry one. India can buy Tu-160 from Russia if they want to sell that bomber.
 
The USA had demonstrated more than once how, juat by deploying bombers, potential adversaries have backed down from engaging in hostilities. A bomber is a useful military tool in diplomacy.
However, should India should pursue such a course, then it becomes a question of how big a bomber should India operate? Who does India see as potential threats that warrant an attack by bombers? The size of the bomber, and bomber fleet would depend on that answer. Would it be the size of a FB-111, or a Tu-122, or even a Tu-160? Not these bombers, but a more modern stealthier versions of these bombers? How about transport aircraft air launching cruise missiles out of the back of the aircraft? Wouldn't pursuing such a system be a cheaper alternative than buying, and maintaining a bomber fleet?
 
First S5 nuclear submarine is to enter production by 2027 and join the fleet in the mid 2030's. The article is talking about the near future projects and long range stealth bombers like B21. The chinese has already developed H20 which is on flight trials. India should focus on current urgent projects for smooth and efficient delivery on projected timelines. Negotiations with foreign partner collaboration on AMCA advanced technology engines should not drag on for too long to complete the deal and get on with the AMCA Engine project. There is a critical unresolved issue on the procurement of 114 MRFA to close the gap in fighter squadrons. This long due issue has been blatantly ignored but ambitious plans on having long range stealth bombers fleet for the IAF seems like a joke. The government is not interested in acquiring 114 MRFA bcoz they feel that Tejas Mk1A and Mk2 will solve the stopgap. But the question is when will HAL produce the numbers to compliment the stopgap. The chinese has produce 5th gen stealth fighters in big numbers and now making new upgrades.
 
Last edited:
Let us not grow beyond our Shoes. We are not a super power. We don't need to be one. It will be a waste of effort.
 
IAF don't need such bombers. Stealth bombers are used where enemy AD systems have been neutralized. Else even they have stealth coating, but can be detected by advanced ADS and then these would be sitting ducks.
This is the main reason that Russia is not able to use their TU-160 in full potential.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
4,867
Messages
54,053
Members
3,697
Latest member
Dranzer Knight
Back
Top