Bharat Rakshak

Thanks Vishnu & Shiv (ermm..do we have Brahma on BRF? ). It was amazing documentary. Expected more on Garuds but Sukhois were a treat to my eyes.....thanks once again.

Vishnu and Shiv God bless you both...although as Mr. Venkari mentioned above I feel quite ironic saying that...

Us "abhaga" SDRE/TDREs outside Yindia can finally watch it now...stupid work pc wont let me download it at work....arrrghhhh

Anyhow thanks again for this.

Cheers

Folks credit and thanks should really go to Vishnu. I have done very little.

Sorry this is blocked from my office server. Would it be all right to download into youtube? I think Vishnu would need copyright clearances.

If not, tis fine, I will try to do it over another computer/server.

Thanks,

Mukul.

can someone recommend an FLV viewer that is acceptable to corporate firewalls? all of the one's i've found require signing up for various things in the process that do not pass muster

try vlc player.

I did

and ? vlc works on .flv for me.

doesn't seem to work if you don't accept the other cr@p that comes with it...

Please use KMPlayer, it plays all the format prevelent
currently. no need to signup or any thing. free as in
free beer. download link

Its already on YouTube...

thanks - this worked just fine

The IAF at Red Flag 2008: The True Story

Hi ... for all of you who are out there in the internet world and who have an interest in the performance of the Indian Air Force at Red Flag 2008 .. I have a few remarks. As the only Indian journalist who spent a lengthy period of time at Nellis after being granted permission by both the Indian Air Force and the US Air Force, I was granted access to impeccable sources in both forces. Whats more, I was able to independently corroborate this information with reliable, alternative sources.

Several of the points I present here in the form of this post on the Bharat Rakshak forum will be compiled into an article which I will post on my company website ndtv.com. For those of you not familiar with the Indian media ... New Delhi Television (NDTV) is India's largest 24 hour news network and our website is one of the most viewed among news websites in the country. For the moment, I have decided not to do a television news report on this since I believe the contents of this post are too technical for a larger audience.

For starters ... and this cannot be stressed enough ... the Red Flag exercises were a brilliant learning experience for all the participants, not least of all the Indian Air Force which, over a period of time, has earned the reputation of being one of the world's finest operational air forces.

This was a reputation which was reinforced at Red Flag 2008, the world's most advanced air combat exercises where the Indian Air Force fielded a number of state of the art Sukhoi 30 MKI jets in addition to IL-76 transports and IL-78 mid air refuellers.

For other participants at the Red Flag exercises ... namely the South Korean Air Force, French and US Air Force ... the opportunity to train with a platform such as the Sukhoi 30 MKI was an opportunity which just couldn't be missed. This has a lot to do not just with the jet but also with the air force operating the fighter, a force which has made a mark as an innovative operator of fast jets.

The US Air Force … the host of these exercises … was singularly gracious in its appreciation for the Indian Air Force contingent which came into Red Flag having trained extensively for the exercises not only back home but also at the Mountain Home Air Force base in the US.

Contrary to unsolicited remarks by certain serving US personnel not directly linked to day to day operations at the exercises … the Indian Air Force and its Su-30s more than made a mark during their stint in the United States.

For starters … not a single Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter was `shot down’ in close air combat missions at the Mountain Home air base. In fact, none of the Sukhois were even close to being shot down in the 10 odd one on one sorties which were planned for the first two days of the exercises at Mountain Home. These one on one engagements featured USAF jets such as the F-15 and F-16 in close air engagements against the Su-30 MKI. The majority of the kills claimed in these engagements were granted to the Indian Air Force with the remainder of these being no-results. Indian Air Force Sukhois did use their famed thrust vectoring in these one on one engagements. Contrary to what may have been reported elsewhere … the Su-30 has a rate of turn of more than 35 degrees when operating in the thrust vector mode. In certain circumstances, this goes up substantially.

By the time the exercises at Mountain Home had matured … the Indian Air Force had graduated to large formation exercises which featured dozens of jets in the sky. In one of these exercises … the blue forces, of which the Indian Air Force was a part … shot down more than 21 of the enemy jets. Most of these `kills’ have been credited to the Indian Air Force.

By the time the Indian Air Force was ready for Red Flag, the contingent had successfully worked up using the crawl, walk, run principle. At Red Flag though, they found themselves at a substantial disadvantage vis a vis the other participants since they were not networked with AWACS and other platforms in the same manner in which USAF or other participating jets were. In fact, Indian Air Force Sukhois were not even linked to one another using their Russian built data links since American authorities had asked for specifics of the system before it was cleared to operate in US airspace. The IAF, quite naturally, felt that this would compromise a classified system onboard and decided to go on with the missions without the use of data links between the Sukhois.

Neither was the Indian Air Force allowed to use chaff or flares, essential decoys to escape incoming missiles which had been fired by enemy jets. This was because the US FAA had visibility and pollution related concerns in the event that these were used in what is dense, busy air space in the Las Vegas region.

The Red Flag exercises themselves were based on large force engagements and did not see the Indian Air Force deploy thrust vectoring at all on any of the Sukhoi 30 jets not that this was required since the engagements were at long ranges.

Though it is true that there were 4-5 incidents of fratricides involving the Indian Air Force at Red Flag … it is important to point out the following:

In the debriefs that followed the exercises … responsibility for the fratricides were always put on the fighter controllers not the pilots. Its also important to point that unlike in Mountain Home, none of the Indian Air Force’s own fighter controllers were allowed to participate since there was classified equipment at Nellis used for monitoring the exercises. The lack of adequate controlling and the fact that Nellis fighter controllers often had problems understanding Indian accents (they had problems understanding French accents as well) resulted in a lack of adequate controlling in situations. Whats more … given the fact that the availability of AWACS was often low … the bulk of fratricides took place on days when the AWACS jet was not deployed. Whats important to remember though is that US participants in these exercises had a similar number of fratricides despite being fully linked in with data links and the latest IFF systems.

So was the Indian Air Force invincible at Red Flag. In a word … no. So yes, there were certainly days in which several Sukhoi jets were shot down. And there were others when they shot down many opposing jets. Ultimately though … the success of the Indian Air Force at Red Flag lay in the fact that they could meet their mission objectives as well, if not better, than any other participant. Despite the hot weather conditions, the IAF had a 95 per cent mission launch ratio, far better than some of the participants.

And no one went into the exercises thinking the score line would be a perfect one in favour of the IAF. In fact … the IAF went into these exercises with an open mind and with full admiration of the world beating range at Nellis with an unmatched system of calibrating engagement results.

Perhaps the most encouraging part of these exercises comes from the fact that the Indian Air Force’s young pilots … learnt from their mistakes, analysed, appreciated and came back strong. Mistakes were not repeated. In fact … the missions where the IAF did not fare well turned out to be immense learning experiences.

At the end of the exercises … its more than clear that the IAF’s Su-30s were more than a match for the variants of the jets participating at the Red Flag exercises. Considering the fact that the central sensor of the Sukhoi, its radar … held up just fine in training mode …despite the barrage of electronic jamming augurs well for the Indian Air Force.

As for its young pilots … these are skills and experiences that they will take back to their squadrons … experiences which will be passed on to a whole new set of pilots who will come into the next set of exercises that much wiser.

Vishnu Som
Associate Editor and Senior Anchor
NDTV

Consider this - Vishnu's post burns the airwaves, gets picked up by a BR-lurker journo and eventually becomes a ticker item on NDTV.... maybe not NDTV ..... if he has the authority to 'moderate' the NDTV ticker.

Moving Vishnu's posts here to separate it from some of the newbie comments from the other thread.
So this is essentially Vishnu's special thread !

Warning: No more FOD discussion or "I don't see what's the problem with col's comments" type posts.
My patience is wearing thin with that stuff.

vishnu, thanks for those insights, especially about the su's network.

just a query, the units at MH, viz.


were these red forces F-15s and F-16s from regular USAF squadrons or dedicated aggressor ones ?
could you mention the units ?
thanks.

Vishnu,

2 questions based on your post:

Q.1) Interesting thing you mentioned about why Su30-Su30 data links were not used. From your experience is this an issue unique to Red Flag (yanks trying to have a go at gathering easy intel by claiming 'sensitive airspace') or is this a normal thing to do for the host to ask participant airforce to reveal their datalink specs??? I wonder how come the french were not taken to task what with all their 'electronic snooping'

Q.2) Re. the chaff issue (which I heard of before).....is the chaff used by US-origin/French aircraft of some green friendly organic variety or something that their use was allowed....or did nobody use flares and chaffs in the exercise???

Great job! Once again all of us are mighty proud that we have someone like you working for the Indian media! 2 thumbs up!
Best regards.

Well written Vishnu, and with loads of Info to boot.
A few questions from me:
1. At mountain base, Idaho, did IAF controllers board AWACS and gave directions to the MKI's
2. So the MKI's were not only not linked to the AWACS but also not amongst themselves. And the Bars proved resistant to jamming - Good show IAF and Sukhoi.
My request to the powers that be, will be to equip the next batch of aircraft for all US-India engagements with USAF AWACS compatible equipment for the exercises at least.

PS: About too much technical info in this story, I feel that the media should also work to increase the technical level of its viewers, by building familiarity with the equipment that our forces operate.
A wonderful example is the Chandrayaan-1 mission. I have been going through what reporting the vernacular media is coming out with. And I see no difference between english and vernacular in terms of what is obviously very high quality and high tech reporting. Some very technical terms have been mentioned and absorbed by the general public. Very surprising, but also very true.

Was this restriction for everyone in the exercises or just for IAF ?

Here is the google video of Red Flag documentary made by Vishnu Som, NDTV.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 8122432671

At MUO (Mountain Home) the IAF flew with the resident 390th FS "Wild Boars" (F-15C), 391st FS "Bold Tigers" (F-15E), 53rd Test and Evaluation Group from Eglin AFB (F-15C, and one F-15E), and the 18th Aggressor Sqn "Blue Foxes" (F-16C) from Eielson AFB. The 18th AGRS converted to Aggressor status in 2007 - so they are fairly new to the aggressor game.

As far as the use of chaff and flares are concerned - though the military training range is used by the USAF, the FAA is still the overseeing body - and terms the range areas as Special Use Airspace (SUA).

Found the below section in a document which covers handling SUA Environmental Processing Procedures -

5. SUA ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.

In addition to other environmental considerations required under NEPA, CEQ regulations, and FAAO 1050.1E, the following are items the FAA expects to be considered, if applicable, in SUA environmental documents. This list should not be considered all-inclusive:

a. Other Times by NOTAM. When specified in the proposal, this provision permits access to the SUA area 24 hours per day. The environmental document must address the potential impact for use of the SUA during the "other times by NOTAM" period.

b. Flares and Chaff. Address the potential impact of flare and/or chaff use when this activity is specified in the SUA proposal. <-------

c. "No Action Alternative." Include discussion of this alternative.

d. Coastal Zone Consistency Determination. Include if applicable.

e. Proposed Airspace Parameters. The environmental analysis in the EA or EIS for the SUA proposal must match the airspace parameters contained in the SUA proposal (i.e., boundaries, altitudes, times of use, and type and extent of activities).

f. Non-participating Aircraft. Include a discussion of the effect of the SUA proposed action on non-participating aircraft, if applicable.

g. Mitigation. As defined in CEQ regulations, mitigation includes:

1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;

2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation;

3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;

4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and

5. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

h. Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts on the environment are those that result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal and Non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

i. Consultation. Consultation shall be conducted in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106; the Endangered Species Act, Section 7; FAAO 1210.20

"American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and Procedures," and other applicable
laws, regulations, and Department of Transportation and FAA Orders.

You can find the entire document at
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ ... rapp8.html

Safe to say, that the chaff/flares being used by anyone, have to be cleared to operate in the US airspace. Since we cannot come up with alternatives, the non-use of flares/chaff by the Sus must have been decided by the appropriate authorities.

AFAIK, there was no AWACS support at MUO. and the infrastructure at MUO is to accomplish very basic debrief, and not geared to support a Red Flag debrief, with all the hi tech equipment.

Kedar .. thanks so much for these details. I will incorporate some of this into my piece as well.

Any further questions anyone?

Vishnu

Point to note guru-jano, this is especially for those whiners who are paranoid about Unkil sniffing the trons on IAF air-craft.

If possible any public info on what accounted for most of Su kills since it seems Red Flag also simulates ground based anti-aircraft missiles/guns/rocks of rooskie origin? In the aircraft-aircraft kills, was it all BVR dhamakas or were there were losses due to eyeball-to-eyeball fights after merge?

Many thanks.

A few questions based on Vishnu's post

1. You have mentioned that the Sukhoi has a rate of turn of close to 35 degrees. Can this be collaborated from other open sources because the leaked video mentions the Su's having a turn rate of closer to 24 degrees.
What would this mean in terms of energy bleeding of the aircraft ?

2. Any information on trying to shoot down the AWACS being part of mission obejctive.

3. Can you elaborate on the role played by the transports and refullers during the exercise. This is not clear to me as the Sukhoi's have a really long endurance and dont think the US planes use IAF tankers to refuel due to equipment incompatibility.

4. You have only talked about air to air missions. Any info on air to ground missions or the missions involving the Garuds would be really appreciated.

Hi Vishnu. Many many thanks for this write up. Eagerly waiting for the final article at NDTV. I wish a documentary were made out of this to be aired on NDTV. It will be a "Ghoonsa" on the faces of flightglobal and aviationweek which did copy paste articles from that youtube video.

Cheers...

Hello Vishnu,

Thank you for your insightful article. Like others, I too have a few questions:

1. I watched a similar documentary on hulu.com (it had same videos as yours, giving 3D AWACS visualization), however, in that video I saw jets freely using flares to avoid heat-seeking missiles - I wonder why Indians were not allowed to use flares.

2. A video is floating around on internet wherein a soldier is briefing about Indian performance, he (the soldier in video) says that in 1-1 combat Indians gotten beaten very often and at the end of third or fourth day, the decided to move on to some different excercise. It would be wonderful if you can provide something to refute the video as farce.

Thanks.

babbupandey,

that video has been discussed to death here. Please take the time to go through the discussions, it might perhaps answer your questions.

JaiS,

I went through that thread, my previous question may have sounded stupid - however I could not resist asking from a person who has been the live witness to the show.

Vishnu I have a small request for you: Can you wack some sense into our desi news reporter birathers and cure them of the severe DDMitis that they are suffering from.

Srini - if you do some googling, you will find the answer yourself..

Vanilla Mig29 has a max instantaneous turn rate of 28deg/sec & sustained turn rate of 23-24deg/sec..
How do you expect the Su30MKI with its larger control surfaces & thrust vectoring to have only 24deg/sec ONLY..

Suggestion to newbies - please try to do it yourself first.. soon you will find yourself becoming more aware & able to participate in healthier discussions..

people are talking of A2A battles onree. but afair, they left at night after dinner and
recovered at dawn. was this for night BVR work or for the officially stated goal of A2G
DPSA sorties?

Great report Vishnu.. You have pretty much covered everything -- whats more, you have captured everything in a very systematic and logical manner..

The points you made regarding 1-on-1's at MountainHome, fratricides, problems with accent of controllers exactly reflect the points in the "unofficial" e-mail that Shiv had posted on the forum (dont know how many even took notice of it).. Even when you watch the video - there is nothing to be worried about if you think.. fratricides were due to lack of datalinks - which is handicap that IAF will overcome in future.. Even if f15's got a few kills at mountainhome (as claimed in the video) - it is bcoz they went back from cope05 and trained with Raptors and found "one method" to catch Su30.. But will not the IAF boys comeback and work on counter-tactics and be prepared for next one..

A single final question, though -- why was the IFF not so effective at even 20NM range? IFF is supposed to be effective for even longer range - why in the first place it was ineffective? and that too at 20NM? Is it bcoz of so much electronic clutter?

Hi there ... answers to a few questions ...

1. You have mentioned that the Sukhoi has a rate of turn of close to 35 degrees. Can this be collaborated from other open sources because the leaked video mentions the Su's having a turn rate of closer to 24 degrees. What would this mean in terms of energy bleeding of the aircraft ?

Answer ... The leaked video is sort of correct ... the Su-30s have a turn rate close (read more than) to 24 degrees. In TVC mode ... this goes up subsantially. I think the bigger question here is whether the Su 30 MKI with TVC has a higher turning rate than the F-22.

2. Any information on trying to shoot down the AWACS being part of mission obejctive.

Answer ... I believe there may have been some missions against high value targets. I do not know the results of these engagements.

3. Can you elaborate on the role played by the transports and refullers during the exercise. This is not clear to me as the Sukhoi's have a really long endurance and dont think the US planes use IAF tankers to refuel due to equipment incompatibility.

Answer .. the Transports flew in every mission as did the tankers. Both were high value targets themselves. Refuelling was done exclusively on IAF Sukhois for training purposes. This had nothing to do with the range of the Su.


4. You have only talked about air to air missions. Any info on air to ground missions or the missions involving the Garuds would be really appreciated.

Answer ... Garuds were used to lase targets. They were used in the downed airman rescue role. They were used in the anti-terrorist role as well (this I will need to cross check). They were dropped into the middle of the desert ... and had to navigate themselves to a destination. The used US supplied ATVs ...

Rakall asked ... why was the IFF not so effective at even 20NM range? IFF is supposed to be effective for even longer range - why in the first place it was ineffective? and that too at 20NM? Is it bcoz of so much electronic clutter?

Hi ... dont have an answer yet to your IFF question though I will tell you that at some ranges .. IAF Sukhois asking fighter controllers for an ident on an aircraft were sometimes met with no reply. By the time they figured out things it was too late.

Wonderful report Vishnu.Since you were on the spot,it is heartening to see an unbiased view/report of what took place and the unusual circumstances in which the IAF Sukhois participated.It would be most interesting to BRites if you could give us your candid view of the performance of other participating aircraft and what buzz could be garnereed from the participants,especially as some of them are in the running for the MMRCA contest.

Re-posting here as its relevant to the debate


The email reply is quite consistent with what vishnu is saying. I wouldnt give too much weight to one guy's comments especially after him being proven wrong on several counts.
Lets discuss other things except the video please.
PS: GJ welcome back, good to have to back as long as you dont say "Ban K Mehta".

"Neither was the Indian Air Force allowed to use chaff or flares, essential decoys to escape incoming missiles which had been fired by enemy jets."....

Just curious to know how do they simulate missile firings.... and if the missile firing is simulated why is it necessary to drop chaff/flares?? and how is 'kill' confirmed on a missile shot??

A quick couple of important points about fratricide incidents ...

None of the fratricides saw Sukhois shooting down Sukhois. Any fratricide incidents committed by the Indian Air Force were because of the following reasons ...

IAF Sukhois are not fitted with IFF Mode 4 which is the NATO standard. Hence they could not interrogate their contacts.
The radar IFF onboard the Sukhois is designed to interrogate Indian Air Force fighters ... NATO standard jets obviously do not carry equipment which enables a Sukhoi 30 using its a Bars radar IFF system to interrogate them.

Thanks