The tactics evaluated by Air Force chaps on "deployment" are available to all.They are used to re-evaluate tactics "here",make new ones,used in livefire exercises(with ACMI and advanced instrumentation,this is no longer necessary in many cases) and become "standard" training for newbies.In other word training becomes part of institutional memory.It never dies out.
By the same standards,a "Split-S" will be known to fighter pilots around the world;whoever the inventor may have been,it now belongs to a shared pool of knowledge the world over.
The particulars of the maneuver may change slightly depending on the aircraft flown and the wespons used(when to use the maneuver for max effect).But the basis remains the same.
Hence,its incorrect to note that the "IAF has been exposed to wrtyu tactics" for the first time and that these are lost over a period of time.A lot of slogging goes into making sure that these tactics are reevaluated and remain in Institutional memory for some time to come!Till either iterative or radical advances push them back.I do think things have changed from GC Bhargava's time when AF wives wrote the TACDE "rulebook". A few pilots may have got this info, but a ajority of them have still would not have exposure to it, in that context the statement of 'many IAF pilots being exposed to such environment' is not entirely incorrect.
No.These would remain "codified" as it were.The only difference,the employer of the tactic would be "Bhalla" not "Black" etc.
This western tactics shindig is one more myth.The IAF has used datalinks in conjunction wth MiG29's as well as the entire system in conjunction with MiG29's.These arent "western tactics"/or "eastern tactics" but available to all.
While all this may appear semantic nitpicking,its important to make a distinction.It has not been some time before one myth of "western training vs inferior russian training" has died out..too short for us to watch another equally fallacious myth to spring up and gain wide currency.
Sanjay, The stage we are now seeing is where two BVR equipped adversaries are trying to employ
flexible tactics based around "look first, shoot first" principle. The adversaries not only
being BVR equipped but flying aircraft of similar performance. This is where we do have a
fair amount to learn from the French.
I must add,that the IAf moreorless assumed that the PAF had BVR(through Sparrows) for quite some time and trained to compensate(Though Safedsagar has probably proved or all time this was another myth).Our Opfor may not always have been state of the art -MiG23MF's but there are Mirage 2000's on deputation at TACDE to play both roles!
We have a fair bit to learn from the FAF...i'd say we have a fair bit to learn from everyone!
And the same could be said of them too.
The look first,shoot first" principle has been taken to heart by the powers at be in the IAF for quite some time.In fact,it was this alone that made the IAF invest and wait for the NO11M on the Su30MKI despite the delays it entailed to the project.
The IAF training is defintely not "volley BVR" and this is confirmed.We are pretty dynamic-and this is limited by the equipment we operate.Given what we have inducted recently,the sky is thelimit from now onwards.
My objection,if any,is purely to the assumption that the IAF were exposed to "that western tactics bit" for the first time.If anything,we,as you would know,have spent a fair bit of study and training doing exactly the opposite.
Sri, From the following facts
IAF Mirages have RDM
FAF Mirages have RDI which has atleast 20KM to 30KM more range than RDM
By the end of the exersice, both the IAF and FAF were launching about same time.
Yes. This tells me that
Our guys learnt their lessons fast and adapted to the situation.
Found a way to overcome their technical deficiencies(lesser range of RADAR).
Longer range is not everything, if not coupled with proper and appropriate tactics.
Our guys learnt their lessons fast becuase their basic principles were valid.Because the IAF has been training intensively with BVR for some two decades now.Because the IAF operates four(now five) BVR missiles-The R23,the R27ER/ET,the Super 530D and their associated radars and datlinks.Becuase the IAF uses tactics from the world over-not just western/eastern/Sasian/Chinese/.....
This may all apear nitpicking,but do remember that similar myths "Mostly russian trained Indian Airforce" against the "western trained PAF" have become stuff of (in)fame(y).Its taken a lot of work to demolish that bit of fallacy and it does us no good to have another false myth spring up from the ashes. My opinion of the argument is this.
Yes, IAF has done lots of studies of "Western AFs' BVR tactics", but never experienced them live. It is very different to read and learn about something from a sanitised text book, which cannot easily replace first hand experience. So, Vishnu's statement is still valid. (Here I am making an assumption that the BVR training of the IAF is based on the studies and reports of CAW and other institutions
This is wrong.The IAF has done more.The BVR training on the IAF is extensive and is definitely not based on book reports/tech specs etc.Its realworld to a large degree.And this has included co-training.BVR from text books is impossible.
For more details-hope you catch some fighter jocks!Real interesting stuff. We all know the publicised performance values of all the RADARs. We also know that these are mostly from Lab. tests. The real performance will vary on the day of action.
Nope.The Radars are non critical flight items but are still-as are all aircraft parts-subjected to regular tests.They have a stated life time-for certain parts-and those need to be replaced and are replaced.At any rate,radars dont conk out "in action".(This is done at BRD's and reg checking is done at Station AFBase itself) .The IAF's exercises are as intensive so as to simulate any real time action.And enough "real tests" are also carried out to boot. Hence, using this information in the thick of action is what these excersices are about and developing and practising such scenarios and tactics is what training is all about.
Training is always good!No doubt about that.Even the King of the hill-the USAF-spends mucho moolah going and fighting with even dung beetles(in comparison) just so as to acquire a gld nugget(in case). But certain points must be noted.The IAF has some two decades of BVR experience.This comes from hard won training.
It involves reading assimiliating,applying and practising real world BVR techniques from ALL OVER the world.Not just western,eastern,asian etc.
We apply these tactics with what we have.Skilled crew and available weaponry.
The French have crew of perhaps equal calibre and better weaponry-this would defintely ahve given them the leeway and the edge in Garuda.Not becuase they follow "western BVR tactics" and " we dont"/"have been exposed to them for the first time etc". Since this exercise is played out at TACDE, I am sure there will be lessons for all BVR engagements of IAF.
True.The IAF would have chosen Maharajpur for two reasons.One-can already support Mirages and two- TACDE's ACMI.