SOURCE: AFI
In the strategic calculus of defense procurement, the question of whether India should invest in long-range strategic bombers, such as the Russian Tu-160, remains a topic of debate. Defense analyst VatsRohit recently shared his insights on the potential advantages and challenges of acquiring a small fleet of these bombers, emphasizing both their operational flexibility and the financial implications.
VatsRohit sees the Tu-160, a supersonic, long-range strategic bomber, as a “tremendous capability and flexibility of employment” for India’s defense forces. Known for its vast operational range and formidable payload capacity, the Tu-160 could act as a versatile “missile truck,” enabling India to hold critical enemy targets at risk across a wide geographical area. The Tu-160’s range would permit it to launch long-range cruise missiles from various points over India’s territory, providing unmatched strategic flexibility.
For India, possessing a fleet of 10-12 Tu-160 bombers could open significant operational opportunities. With such range and versatility, these aircraft could strike targets deep within Chinese territory from multiple launch points within India. VatsRohit notes that “the operational use [of these bombers] is limited only by the range of the missiles which it carries,” and points out that these bombers could theoretically operate from states like Himachal Pradesh, Bihar, Assam, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.
The idea of adding a strategic bomber fleet to India’s arsenal is attractive, but it comes with a considerable price tag. Each Tu-160 bomber is estimated to cost no less than $250 million, pushing the total cost of a fleet of 12 to around $3 billion—exclusive of long-term operational and maintenance costs. This upfront cost raises questions of cost-benefit analysis and strategic prioritization.
For the same investment, India could bolster its missile capabilities by developing a robust arsenal of medium-to-long-range ballistic, quasi-ballistic, and cruise missiles. These systems offer a cost-effective way to maintain strategic deterrence, especially in regions close to India’s borders. However, these ground-based systems require significant supporting infrastructure and have to be pre-positioned at fixed locations, limiting their flexibility and potentially making them vulnerable to preemptive strikes.
The primary appeal of the Tu-160 fleet is its unmatched mobility. VatsRohit points out that missile bases are fixed installations, known to adversaries and thus potentially susceptible to enemy strikes. Conversely, the Tu-160 could be based in locations such as Nagpur and Thanjavur during peacetime, and in times of conflict, deployed flexibly across India. Each bomber can be armed with a payload of long-range, air-launched cruise missiles, providing a platform from which India could strike a range of targets within China without relying on fixed missile installations. This mobility would give India a valuable strategic advantage, allowing for a dispersed yet potent deterrent.
In addition to land-based missions, a Tu-160 fleet could also play a role in maritime security. Given its extensive range, endurance, and payload capacity, the Tu-160 could deter Chinese fleets seeking access to the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). By equipping these bombers with anti-ship missiles, India could target hostile fleets before they enter the IOR. In contrast, carrying out similar missions with existing aircraft such as the Su-30MKI would require multiple refueling sorties, significantly increasing operational complexity and cost. This maritime strike capability would allow the Indian Air Force (IAF) to project power over vast distances and extend India’s reach in regional waters.
However, India’s defense budget is limited, and with multiple areas requiring urgent modernization, the choice of acquiring a fleet of strategic bombers will come down to a careful consideration of priorities. With $3 billion, India could significantly strengthen its arsenal of medium-to-long-range missiles or invest in advanced air defenses, drones, or naval assets to counter regional threats.
Although a Tu-160 fleet would bring unique strategic capabilities, VatsRohit cautions that it must be weighed against India’s other defense needs. He acknowledges that a robust missile system can cover many of the same targets with less financial outlay, even if it lacks the mobility of a bomber fleet. In particular, India’s missile program is poised to develop systems with ranges exceeding 1,000 kilometers, further closing the capability gap that a strategic bomber fleet might otherwise fill.
The decision to acquire a Tu-160 fleet would represent a major shift in India’s air force capabilities and posture, adding a versatile and powerful strategic asset. However, VatsRohit suggests that while the Tu-160 offers significant flexibility and firepower, India must consider the steep cost and evaluate whether a strategic bomber fleet aligns with long-term defense priorities.