This thread is (so far) relatively free of the jingoism that threads like this tend unfortunately to draw. Well done, people !

I'm overseas-Chinese but speaking objectively I would be surprised if the IAF weren't superior. Their combination and adaptation of foreign and local tech to improve the SU 30MKI is really impressive. (This comment has nothing to do with my politics.) One wonders, though, why the Indians weren't on the game earlier given that they didn't suffer the same political disruptions to their R & D ?

 

One wonders if, in a war, it would be the Chinese who went on the offensive and India stayed on the defensive. Consider:   

1. One doubts if the Chinese think that they can take and hold territory well over the mountains and a lot closer to India's center of gravity than to China's. That's even without a superior IAF.

2. There will be some in India who might perceive a need for "pay back"which translates to going on the offensive.

3. China going on offensive equals active Indian backing for Tibet independence. (Although the Tibetans also lay claim to land now held by India - temporarily on the backburner.)

 

If there is a re-fight of a high altitude war, one also wonders how much of an air war there would be. Look at the Kargil War. The Indiansdidn't bring to bear their superior air power to pound the positions in the mountains held by the other side. There were sound limitations to the use of air power at high altitude. Given that the PLAAF currently lacks the modern aircraft and training to mount an air-to-ground offensive or general interdiction, air activity isn't going to feature much on China's side. The implicit pressure might in fact be on the Indian side to "make something" of the airsuperiority that has been vaunted on the net. So it is India that might deem itself under pressure to do a limited ground offensive with support of its superior air force.