The Tibetan Plateau’s high altitude can constrain aircraft payload, range and operational efficiency, according to IAF Chief A.P. Singh.
India’s lower-altitude airbases provide an operational advantage over China in parts of the India-China border region, where high-altitude airfields on the Tibetan Plateau can limit aircraft performance, Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal A.P. Singh has said.
In an interview with Business Standard published on October 26, 2026, Singh acknowledged that China has a larger overall air force inventory and has significantly modernised its air and aerospace capabilities. However, he said the geography of the Tibetan Plateau creates constraints on Chinese air operations against India.
“While its air force has a larger overall inventory, its operations against India are constrained by the geography of the Tibetan plateau, where high-altitude airfields reduce payload, range and turnaround time,” Singh said.
He added that the Indian Air Force (IAF) operates from lower-altitude, all-weather forward airbases that allow aircraft to carry their full payloads and respond more quickly.
How the Tibetan Plateau affects air operations
The Tibetan Plateau, which covers a large part of western China’s Tibet Autonomous Region, is characterised by high elevations, mountainous terrain and difficult weather conditions. These factors create challenges for military aviation, particularly during take-off and sustained operations.
At high altitudes, air density is lower. This reduces the lift generated by an aircraft’s wings at a given true airspeed and can affect engine performance. Aircraft may require longer runways to take off safely, particularly when carrying heavy weapons and fuel loads.
As a result, fighter aircraft operating from high-altitude bases may have to reduce their payload or fuel, depending on the aircraft, weather and runway conditions. Such restrictions can affect the distance an aircraft can travel, the weapons it can carry and the missions it can perform.
The challenges can also affect operational turnaround times. Preparing aircraft for repeated sorties requires fuel, weapons, maintenance, spare parts and ground support. Difficult terrain and extreme weather can complicate these activities. The extent of these effects varies according to aircraft type, base infrastructure and operating conditions.
A 2022 analysis by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), published through its ChinaPower Project, documented the expansion of China’s air infrastructure in Tibet and Xinjiang, alongside the operational challenges associated with high-altitude airfields.
The analysis identified 37 airports and heliports in the two regions where construction or upgrades had been initiated since 2017. At least 22 were identified as military or dual-use facilities, or were expected to serve those purposes once completed.
The report also noted that 20 air facilities in Tibet and Xinjiang were located more than 3,000 metres above sea level. These facilities form part of China’s broader effort to improve its ability to deploy aircraft, personnel and equipment along its western borders.
Why India’s lower-altitude bases matter
India’s lower-altitude airbases offer more favourable atmospheric conditions for aircraft operations. Compared with high-altitude airfields, they generally allow aircraft to take off with fewer altitude-related performance penalties.
This can give the IAF greater flexibility in carrying fuel and weapons, depending on the aircraft and mission requirements. It can also help aircraft generate sorties more efficiently and respond to operational requirements along the border.
The location of an airbase is another important factor. Forward bases can reduce the distance aircraft must travel to reach a particular area, potentially improving response times and reducing the time spent travelling to and from the operational zone.
However, the advantage varies by location and mission. Not all Indian bases are at low elevations, and aircraft performance also depends on runway length, temperature, aircraft design, weapons configuration and available support systems.
The comparison, therefore, is not simply between the total number of aircraft operated by India and China. It also involves how many aircraft each side can deploy to a particular theatre, how much fuel and weaponry they can carry, and how effectively they can sustain operations.
China continues to expand its air infrastructure
Despite the geographical challenges, China has invested heavily in improving its military infrastructure across Tibet and Xinjiang.
The CSIS ChinaPower analysis documented upgrades to existing airports, the construction of new facilities and improvements to roads and other transport links. Such infrastructure can help China move personnel and equipment closer to the border and improve logistical support for military operations.
Several of the facilities identified in the analysis are close to the India-China border. These include airfields in areas such as Shigatse and Nyingchi in Tibet, as well as Hotan in Xinjiang.
Longer runways, expanded aircraft parking areas, hangars and supporting infrastructure can improve the ability of airfields to accommodate military aircraft. A network of bases can also allow forces to distribute their aircraft and support assets across multiple locations.
China’s expanding infrastructure does not eliminate the effects of high altitude, but it can help reduce some operational limitations and strengthen its ability to sustain a military presence near the border.
Advanced aircraft, aerial refuelling, surveillance systems and other support capabilities can also help mitigate certain constraints. Their effectiveness, however, depends on availability, integration and the conditions in which they are used.
Aircraft numbers do not tell the whole story
Singh’s remarks come amid continued military modernisation by both India and China. He acknowledged China’s larger air force inventory but cautioned against assessing military strength through numerical comparisons alone.
In the same interview, Singh said the IAF’s planning also accounts for China’s close defence cooperation with Pakistan. He said the assistance Pakistan receives from Beijing is a factor in India’s security calculations.
The IAF is developing its capabilities to address what Singh described as “collusive threats” involving the two countries.
The Chief of the Air Staff also stressed the importance of training, maintenance, weapons integration and operational experience when assessing advanced fighter aircraft. The induction of a new aircraft, he said, does not automatically translate into a fully developed combat capability.
This highlights the distinction between a country’s total aircraft inventory and the combat power it can generate in a particular region. Air power depends on aircraft numbers, but also on their readiness, weapons, support systems, logistics and the ability to conduct sustained operations.
A geographical advantage, not a guarantee
The Tibetan Plateau creates challenges for Chinese military aviation, particularly because high-altitude airfields can limit payload and affect aircraft performance. India’s lower-altitude forward bases can reduce some of these constraints and may allow the IAF to respond more efficiently in relevant sectors.
However, these factors alone do not determine the outcome of a potential conflict. China’s investment in airfields, transport infrastructure and advanced aircraft must also be considered, alongside India’s own logistical requirements and operational limitations in mountainous terrain.
The effectiveness of either air force would ultimately depend on the aircraft and weapons available, surveillance and air defence systems, electronic warfare, maintenance, logistics and the wider operational situation.
Singh’s assessment underlines a central point in military planning: geographical conditions can shape how effectively air power is used, and the number of aircraft a country possesses is only one measure of its operational capability.
About the Author
