Transport Aircraft for IAF

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by brar_w »

If the Russians guarantee above 80% availability rates and spares supply then i am all for buying the MIG 35.
Performance based logistics isn't about simple guarantees. It is about developing, negotiating a binding contract with financial implications for non-delivery of the contractually agreed upon services. Prior to even offering such a contract to a potential customer, the OEM itself has to sign similar delivery guarantees with each of its suppliers so as to not get shafted by losses for failure of a component supplier to meet timeline, quality, and quantity obligations. On top of that there is the cost element i.e. the price/cost of the contract itself should not be prohibitive. So far, Russian OEM's have not to the best of my knowledge offered long term sustainment PBL contracts so there is quite a lot of work to be done since these are not easy to develop especially if the fleet you are sustaining is not significant in size (such as the Mig-35).
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Viv S »

Philip wrote:We're going to spend according to the latest report in the Raffy td.$200M /aircraft! That's twice the old estimated cost of an FGFA.One can be sure that Russia will find other partners if we refuse the first offers of collaboration.
Really? Like whom?
The MTA cost est was $35-40M/aircraft.Let's see what the alternative options the IAF want will cost.A C-130J costs from approx $70M for the US and upto $100M for export orders.[/b]
But look,according to the def min's statement in parliament,6 C-130Js cost us... $ 962.4 million
That's $160M/C-130J and over $400M/C-17!
Don't omit the development cost from the MTA 'estimates', to which both sides would no doubt contribute equitably, with the funds expended mostly in Russia.

Your other figures are wrong as well. The C-17 came for $220 mil each. The C-130J meanwhile costed us about $100 mil/unit and that too only because we bought a special ops variant. The plain vanilla C-130J is available for $70 million flyaway.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

??????????? Was this posted?

On the eve of PMs visit to IL-476?

Dec 21, 2015 :: India plans to acquire ten C-17 Globemaster III from Boeing
The Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has reportedly unveiled plans to acquire ten additional C-17 Globemaster III strategic aircraft from Boeing, in a bid to expand the Indian Air Force's (IAF) tactical airlifter fleet.

In a statement, the Indian MoD said: "The request for acquiring ten additional Boeing C-17 Globemaster III aircraft is being processed.

"Such a purchase will give IAF significant global strategic capability."

In June 2011, the IAF contracted Boeing to supply ten 70t C-17 aircraft for the replacement of its ageing Russian IL-76 airlifter fleet at an estimated cost of $4.1bn.

Expected to be used for military and humanitarian airlift roles during emergencies from Hindon Air Force Base in New Delhi, India, the IAF C-17s were most recently deployed in support of Cyclone Phailin relief operations.

Powered by four Pratt & Whitney F117-PW-100 turbofan engines, the C-17 Globemaster is designed to conduct rapid strategic airlift of troops and supply palleted cargo to main operating bases or forward-operating bases (FOBs) in extreme environments worldwide.

Capable of transporting large payloads across vast ranges and landing on short, sharp runways, the aircraft is also capable of performing tactical airlift, medical evacuation and airdrop missions.

The aircraft is also operated by air forces in the US, Australia, UAE, Canada and Qatar, the UK and the 12-member Strategic Airlift Capability initiative of Nato and Partnership for Peace nations.

Meanwhile, the company announced its decision to end production of the C-17 production programme after the final Boeing C-17 Globemaster III departed its Long Beach Assembly facility in California in November this year.

The final aircraft will be delivered to Qatar Emiri Air Force in 2016.

However, Boeing will continue to provide support, maintenance and upgrades to the worldwide C-17 fleet under the C-17 Globemaster III Integrated Sustainment Program (GISP) Performance-Based Logistics agreement.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

Wonder if Boeing wanted an additional 7 to "reopen" their plan.

Dec 19, 2015 :: India Plans Ten C17 Aircraft Buy Despite Boeing Plant Closure
India plans to acquire 10 additional C-17 Globemaster III strategic airlift aircraft to add to its fleet of six planes (?) acquired from Boeing over the past few years.

"The request for acquiring 10 additional Boeing C-17 Globemaster III aircraft is being processed. Such a purchase will give IAF significant global strategic capability", an official statement from the Indian government said yesterday as part of the year-end review of the Ministry of Defence.

However, Boeing had announced on November 29 that it plans to shut down the C-17 manufacturing facilities due to lack of orders after the last of the iconic planes rolled out of the pant in California, USA.

India had earlier wanted three additional aircraft and it is interesting the requirement has gone up by six even as Boeing started the process of shutting down the plant more than a year ago.

Unless there are order cancellations or the US governments accommodates India from the US Air Force inventory, chances of receiving the C-17s is bleak.

The last of the C-17s has been committed to Qatar, the U.S government had announced earlier.

"This is truly the end of an era. It's a sad day, but one that all of the Boeing employees and suppliers who have worked over the years building this great aircraft can be proud of," Nan Bouchard, vice president and C-17 program manager, Boeing said in a statement marking the end of production of C-17 Globemaster November 30.

An option for India is to consider the Russian Ilyushin Il-76MD-90A heavy lift aircraft the modernized version of the venerable IL-76.
member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by member_23370 »

There are no more C-17's . Unless second hand ones are being considered IAF should be happy with the 10 they have.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5722
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Kartik »

They were dozing when Boeing was making it clear that the line was closing fast and the final few white tails were up for grabs. After all were claimed, these guys woke up and now want more. The line is now closed and won't be reopened since people were already let go of.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by brar_w »

Since the IAF operates the C17, i thought this to be the appropriate place for this. Mods, please move it to an appropriate thread if it isn't.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3118
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by JTull »

Pierre de Bausset (Airbus) inverview with Huma Siddiqui
Q. What is the status of C295 bid?
A.
After the government decided to move ahead with our bid, now the evaluation process is on as per the defence procurement procedure. This is an excellent ‘Make in India’ project. Out of the requirement for 56 aircraft, Tata and we would build the majority of the aircraft in India. The local final assembly line will spawn a robust base of domestic suppliers that will feed the production line. This is a tangible opportunity to translate Make in India into reality. Moreover, when the programme will start, we strongly believe that production will not stop at 56 but will increase to cover additional Indian and global orders.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3118
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by JTull »

Tata-Airbus project for replacing ageing Avro fleet of IAF still in limbo
At a time when the government is tom-tomming the "Make in India" week, the defence ministry's first major aircraft-manufacturing project for the domestic private sector with foreign collaboration remains stuck in the doldrums.

Defence ministry sources say there is "no tangible progress yet" in the Rs 11,929 crore project for the manufacture of 56 medium transport aircraft by the Tata-Airbus consortium to replace the ageing Avro fleet of the IAF.

Image
"Even the preliminary field trials of the C-295 aircraft on offer are yet to begin almost a year after the Manohar Parrikar-led defence acquisitions council (DAC) finally approved the Tata-Airbus project after much delay," said a MoD source.

"It was supposed to be the stellar defence project under the Make in India policy but is languishing at just the initial paper evaluation stage. The IAF submitted the technical evaluation committee (TEC) report last year but it's yet to be cleared," he added.

The extensive field evaluation, with the twin-turboprop tactical airlifter C-295 being brought to India, can only take place after the TEC report is approved. The trials, in turn, have to be followed by the long-winded staff evaluation, technical oversight, commercial negotiations, financial approvals and the like before the contract will get anywhere near being inked. The deliveries, of course, will begin much later.

Asked about the continuing delay in the crucial project, which was touted as a path-breaking one to encourage the Indian private sector to enter into the domestic military aerospace sector, the MoD only said: "It is proceeding. Field trials will be conducted soon."

It was a bold decision in May 2015 when the DAC had approved the Tata-Airbus project despite it being "a single vendor/bidder situation". The rationale was that though the other seven contenders had backed out for one reason or the other, the Tata-Airbus consortium's technical and commercial bids had been submitted in a competitive environment.

Under the project, the first 16 aircraft are to be bought from the foreign original equipment manufacturer, while the rest 40 would be manufactured by the Indian Production Agency (IPA) within eight years.

"The project can become bigger because the IPA is free to manufacture the aircraft for the civil aviation sector after meeting the IAF's requirement. But there has been little follow-through to fast-track the critical project, which the industry is watching with great interest," said a source.

Incidentally, it was the NDA government's first DAC in July 2014 that had revived this Avro replacement project after it was put on hold by the previous UPA-II regime due to strong opposition from the powerful PSU lobby and ministers like Praful Patel, as reported by TOI earlier.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

The MTA cost est was $35-40M/aircraft

^^ above looks unrealistic even for just the flyaway a/c. the comparable EMB KC-390 is being pegged @ $85 mil and add in the spares, training, n years of support and uptime SLA contract the per unit cost in final contract could easily be 120 mil.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2914
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Cybaru »

Singha,

That seems like a reasonable sum of 30.5 million a plane. Wiki puts the cost at 28 million. Might not be a bad replacement for AVRO and An-32 in the future.

This will serve as a good MPA and AEW platform as well. Perhaps AirBus could be roped in as consultant for our own MTA. We could use one of the A3XX platforms as a starting point and go from there.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

:shock: A3xx as a mil transporter?
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Philip »

While the report gave no particular reason for this development, it was reported in December 2015 that UAC and HAL were in disagreement over the type of powerplant to be fitted to the aircraft, with the former preferring the PD-14M - a modified version of the already in-service Aviadvigtel PS-90A-76 turbofan as fitted to the Il-76 'Candid' - and the latter wanting a completely clean-sheet engine with full authority digital engine control (FADEC).

"The PS-90 does not have FADEC but the necessity of such a system was not there in the technical specifications initially," the president of UAC, Yury Slyusar, told the Indian Economic Times at the time. "It was added later. The technical requirement [for performance] is fully satisfied with the PS-90 engine.
The Russians have decided upon the engine for their IL-476s and their "MTA".Changing the goalpost reqs for engines has meant that we disengage or go forward. It appears to be the latter.So another req will be pushed backwards for a few more years until another knee-jerk decision will be made.I don't know why the MOD/DM does not come down strongly on those concerned with the mess-up.It' not as if the MTA req/discussions took place last year. The Tata's LTA decision is also delayed.Why so after the aircraft ahs been selected? Is there a two-legged "gremlin" at work sabotaging both transport projects?
vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by vishvak »

Like some elusive engine of LCA per contract signed?!?! There are reasons for MTA being not just another option but much more independent option in case if needed.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

Like the AL-55I.

The only product that will be devoid of strings is an Indian one. Even there India will have to pre-plan on rare materials, etc.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

Just saying:

Oct 15, 2012 :: RIR :: India, Russia hit the ground running with MTA deal
The aircraft will have a glass cockpit for electronic instrument displays, fly by wire controls, full authority digital engine control (FADEC) engines, 800 kmph cruise speed, a range of 2500 km, while its service ceiling would be 12 km.
Somebody did not get the memo or is flying kites in very heavy winds.
The MTA agreement was inked by the Bangalore-based Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) with the United Aircraft Corporation-Transport Aircraft (UAC-TA) of Russia, and their 50:50 joint venture partner, Multirole Transport Aircraft Ltd (MTAL). The three had signed the earlier general contract in May 2012.
Communication gap.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by shiv »

C-17 shows off low-slow flying ability and very short field landing, reversing capability
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qpUmX2fDPg
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Gyan »

Indian Govt/HAL decision is absurd. We should tie up with Russians and absorb their PD-14 engine technology with JVs. This obsession to directly jump to USA/UK level of technology (which in any case nobody is giving to India) is super absurd. China is able to develop stealthy J-20, J-31 with trailing edge Russian technology while we are fooling around with imported gliders, trainers, Hawks and 4th Gen Rafale. Tell me, what is better leading Rafale tech or trailing PAKFA/J-20?
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Kakarat »

Gov. should consider joining the Embraer KC-390 since the MTA is going no further. If HAL joins now may be they can insist for 100% TOT and export rights for the Asian and the African market. KC-390 seems to be pretty slow since first flight and could be due to financial reasons and if so could accept to HAL's terms.

Embraer’s KC-390 Returns to Flight Test
ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 374
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by ragupta »

Embraer should be encouraged to set up there regional jet and KC-390 line in India.
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Kakarat »

Embraer KC-390 is a good looking aircraft

Image

Image
uddu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2091
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by uddu »

Kakarat wrote:Embraer KC-390 is a good looking aircraft

Image

Image
Completely agree. Did discuss this five years before. Am sure we will discuss the same after three years when KC-390 will be chosen.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5693&start=2240
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2225
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Kakarat »

India To Get Six C-130J Transport Aircraft In 2017
Lockheed Martin will be delivering the new batch of C-130J transport military aircraft in 2017, Abhay Paranjape, Business Development Director of C-130 said today.

“We will deliver all 6 C-130J Super Hercules in 2017 to the Indian Air Force,” Paranjape told at the press conference today on sidelines of the DefExpo 2016.

In addition, the US-firm is also in discussion with the India Meteorological Department for specially configured C-130J aircraft that fly into typhoons and hurricanes to obtain information about major storms far more detailed than is provided by weather satellites.

...

India placed an order for additional six C-130Js in 2013, besides operating five more. India lost one C-130J airlifter in 2013 crash.

West Bengal's Panagarh will be the Indian Air Force's (IAF) second hub for these new C-130J Super Hercules aircraft. From the new runway, IAF will start operating the Super Hercules aircraft beginning May this year and from March 2017 a permanent unit will start.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5247
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by srai »

^^^

Again the magic number of around 36-months from order (2013) to begin delivery (2017).

In comparison, the LCA has been in production since Dec 20, 2013 for IOC-2 standard. We are 27-months into it and SP-2 has been delivered. SP-3 is planned for completion around July (31-months). So these guys are working overtime to do this.
Last edited by srai on 30 Mar 2016 16:34, edited 1 time in total.
Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Karthik S »

Kakarat wrote:India To Get Six C-130J Transport Aircraft In 2017
Lockheed Martin will be delivering the new batch of C-130J transport military aircraft in 2017, Abhay Paranjape, Business Development Director of C-130 said today.

“We will deliver all 6 C-130J Super Hercules in 2017 to the Indian Air Force,” Paranjape told at the press conference today on sidelines of the DefExpo 2016.

In addition, the US-firm is also in discussion with the India Meteorological Department for specially configured C-130J aircraft that fly into typhoons and hurricanes to obtain information about major storms far more detailed than is provided by weather satellites.

...

India placed an order for additional six C-130Js in 2013, besides operating five more. India lost one C-130J airlifter in 2013 crash.

West Bengal's Panagarh will be the Indian Air Force's (IAF) second hub for these new C-130J Super Hercules aircraft. From the new runway, IAF will start operating the Super Hercules aircraft beginning May this year and from March 2017 a permanent unit will start.
Didn't we order one more to replace the crashed aircraft.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Austin »

Indian Airborne Troops Script History

The Indian Air Force employed three Russian made IL-76 and fourteen AN-32s. Their latest in inventory, the American Globe Master, C-17 and the Hercules, C-130 were also put to test
. This manoeuvre was carried out simulating a 100 km deep strike air assault intended in the heartland of Pakistan, an aim being to secure the projection area.

Speaking to the officers of the Military Operation’s branch on the side lines was really very reassuring, their confidence was speaking by itself. They informed that the capability to air drop a formation existed only with the countries like the US, Russia and China. India has now joined this elite club. This airborne exercise has validated the IL-76 better than the American machines in use. The Air Headquarter after this event is now considering to enhance the operational service of the Russian IL-76 which was otherwise drawing to an end in the next three years, they added.
Last edited by Austin on 27 Apr 2016 10:34, edited 1 time in total.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2914
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Cybaru »

Oh dem piecemeal orders. Just admit it IAF, you thought the americans would do a russian. Open a closed line to meet their demand. Now the last C17 is spoken for, you have no choice but to extend life on these birds. Anyways they have a lot of life left. Would have been wasteful to retire them this early.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

The Air Headquarter after this event is now considering to enhance the operational service of the Russian IL-76 which was otherwise drawing to an end in the next three years, they added
Paid author. IAF had decided to upgrade the upgraded IL-76s long back. The C-17s, it seems, have given them some respite and extended their life.

And it is not three, but six years.
Just admit it IAF, you thought the americans would do a russian.
Hmmmm. My recollection is that the IAF requested them much earlier. The MoD 's whatever committee that deals with giving the ok, Sat on the request.

One news outlet reporting that India has NOT approached Boeing as yet. However, Boeing claims they will work with India on their request
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

USAF and Boeing complete first phase of C-17 Drag Reduction Programme
The US Air Force (USAF) and Boeing have completed the first phase of Air Force Research Laboratory's C-17 Drag Reduction Programme.

During the first phase, six Vortex Control Technologies Finlets were fixed on the aft part of the fuselage of a C-17 Globemaster III aircraft assigned to Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, US.

USAF 418th Flight Test Squadron test pilot captain Kevin Meyerhoff said: "The C-17 is one of the highest consumers of jet fuel in the Air Force.

"A reduction of just a few percent can result in significant cost savings.

"The cost savings these devices may offer are entirely dependent on the C-17 still being able to fulfil its mission in the Air Force.

"Our testing focused not only on fuel performance, but also on any impacts that the devices may have on the flying qualities of the aircraft.

"This includes the C-17's ability to perform critical air drop missions."

Set off to help reduce fuel costs for the USAF, the C-17 Drag Reduction Programme aims at collecting data ways in which airflow is affected with different structural modifications to a C-17 Globemaster III.

418th Flight Test Squadron project manager Steve Salas said: "Our end goal is to reduce fuel consumption while maintaining military utility."

"This programme has the potential for significant savings in C-17 fuel costs, helping the Air Force stretch its budget even further, while maintaining force readiness."

The next phase of testing will involve adding an additional number of five Finlets to each side of the C-17 aircraft.

The third phase of testing will see the Finlets being removed and six Lockheed Martin microvanes will be placed on each side of the aft fuselage.

The fourth phase will see fairings attached to locations on the wings near the engines and winglets.

The mentioned structural modifications are expected to manipulate the airflow around the aircraft, helping reduce the C-17 fuel costs.

The test series is scheduled to be completed this October.
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4024
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by deejay »

NRao wrote:
The Air Headquarter after this event is now considering to enhance the operational service of the Russian IL-76 which was otherwise drawing to an end in the next three years, they added
Paid author. IAF had decided to upgrade the upgraded IL-76s long back. The C-17s, it seems, have given them some respite and extended their life.

And it is not three, but six years.
Just admit it IAF, you thought the americans would do a russian.
Hmmmm. My recollection is that the IAF requested them much earlier. The MoD 's whatever committee that deals with giving the ok, Sat on the request.

One news outlet reporting that India has NOT approached Boeing as yet. However, Boeing claims they will work with India on their request
It is easier to undermine IAF than do some research.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Karan M »

Nrao - paid author? That's Colonel Danvir Singh, IA rtd, of the Indian Defense Review. He may be mistaken but he is not one of the sell out types.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

Karan M wrote:Nrao - paid author? That's Colonel Danvir Singh, IA rtd, of the Indian Defense Review. He may be mistaken but he is not one of the sell out types.
Sorry, apologise. Was meant to be a play on words - like "two bit" and the like. Find BR is getting to be too slanting and people do not do enough leg work (when a lot of things are in open source now a days). Nothing against the gent, the site, etc.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Indranil »

Actually, the report is correct. It is being reported by various news bearers. And it is not completely unexpected. I had written a post about this not too long ago.
indranilroy wrote:
rohitvats wrote: Just to add: The static line jump happens from much lower altitude and the parachute deploys immediately as the paratrooper exits the aircraft (because the chord used to open the parachute is rigged to a 'static line'). The aim of static line jump is to ensure that maximum number of paratroopers fall on or as close to DZ as possible. Free fall is used by small body of troops. And also requires more training than vanilla para-jump. Not all army paratroopers are free-fall qualified.
Rohit,
You are right that static lines are very useful for short altitude jumps. But they don't help in grouping the paratroopers together. For example, most of the times, Russians don't use a static line. They use a stabilizing chute instead. Some believe that the Russian system groups the paratroopers better. Also, conical parachutes and static lines are not tied together. One can jump from a static line using a rectangular parachute.

Besides, there are other disadvantages of the static line + D-bag system. Because the lines and the D-bags are flaying behind the aircraft, they increase the drag significantly. As a result, the aircraft generally cannot drop the same number of paratroopers as it can carry. Also, two or more personnel have to stay back and pull the lines and D-bags in. Till this is done, the aircraft cannot close the doors which act like giant airbrakes. As a result, the aircraft can't accelerate till the D-bags are pulled in and the doors are closed. On the other hand, the Russians paratroopers leave nothing behind on the plane. Hence the plane can drop the same number of paratroopers as it can carry, requires nobody to pull the lines in, and can close the doors as soon as the last paratrooper has exited and leave the arena sooner.

Additionally, the drops can happen at speeds of up to 400 kmph. Paratroopers can exit from the front door (in front of the engine) allowing the equipment to be dropped from the rear ramp simultaneously. On the other hand, the Americans have a separate drop zones for personnel and and a different one for equipment.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Viv S »

indranilroy wrote:For example, most of the times, Russians don't use a static line. They use a stabilizing chute instead. Some believe that the Russian system groups the paratroopers better. Also, conical parachutes and static lines are not tied together. One can jump from a static line using a rectangular parachute.
Could you elaborate a bit about the Russian system? Because most of the videos I've seen show their paratroopers carrying out static line jumps. And not necessarily from the rear ramp either.

Eg. Jump to 05:30

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Indranil »

Your video perfectly demonstrates what I said. In the D5/6 Russian system only a very small pouch containing a drogue chute is attached to the line. When the paratrooper exits the aircraft, only a small bag attached to a carabiner clip is left on the line. This stays inside the aircraft, there is nothing left to be pulled in. You can see that the "jumpmasters" exit the plane immediately after the last man on either side has exited. On the American system, the jumpmaster(s) have to stay back to pull those lines and bag in. By the way, these men have to be incredibly strong.

Also, because there is nothing flapping in the outside in the Russian system and the main parachute starts to open after the paratrooper has fallen sufficiently below the aircraft, exits in front of the engine is possible. Here is a description short description of the Russian system.
The Russian D5/6 parachute has a drogue stabilizer chute, which is deployed when the Paratrooper exits the door. As he falls away from the airplane stabilized, he can deploy the main chute with a rip cord pull or by an automatic opening device. He can jump from aircraft much lower at 200 feet and much faster up to 300 mph, or at 12, 000 foot high altitudes using the delay-opening feature
Image

Image

The orange chute is the stabilizer chute.

These are good resources to read about both the American and the Russian systems.
http://www.combatreform.org/llparachute.htm
http://www.combatreform.org/T-21.htm
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by nachiket »

Isn't there a danger of getting sucked into the engine when jumping from the front doors? The high-mounted wing will help in that regard but it somehow still looks risky.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Indranil »

^^^ No it is not possible. The drogue chute only stabilizes, doesn't have much retardation power. When exiting the plane, even the drogue chute is only beginning to deploy. Basically, the paratrooper falls like a stone, except that his rotation is arrested because of the deployment of the stabilizing chute. In an automatic system, the drogue chute opens the bag containing the main chute using a delayed opening system. Otherwise, the paratrooper starts a count as soon as he exits the aircraft. On reaching a certain count, he deploys the main chute. In the either of these cases, the paratrooper has cleared the aircraft by 100-200 feet. When jumping from very high altitudes, they use the altimeter to synchronize opening of the chutes.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Viv S »

indranilroy wrote:Your video perfectly demonstrates what I said. In the D5/6 Russian system only a very small pouch containing a drogue chute is attached to the line. When the paratrooper exits the aircraft, only a small bag attached to a carabiner clip is left on the line. This stays inside the aircraft, there is nothing left to be pulled in. You can see that the "jumpmasters" exit the plane immediately after the last man on either side has exited. On the American system, the jumpmaster(s) have to stay back to pull those lines and bag in. By the way, these men have to be incredibly strong.
Ahh.. okay. I assumed drogue chutes were a standard part of all static line systems, although that's mostly because when I did static jumps my gear had a drogue chute that preceded the ram-air parachute.


Two question though -

1. Isn't all this characteristic of the type of parachute gear chosen? That is to say, the IA probably uses the same (Russian?) parachutes irrespective of which aircraft it deploys from, so how do the C-17 & Il-76 come into play?

2. How do they shut the side-doors on the Il-76s if the jumpmasters go out with the last stick of jumpers?
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Indranil »

1. I do not know the combination used by IAF.
2. None of the doors, on the C-17 or the IL-76 are closed manually ofcourse. It is just a matter of placement of the switch.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Philip »

Media report. The R Co. has signed in sev deals with the UKR for a variety of def wares.Engines for FFGs (4 Talwars + another 6 in the second batch may be acquired),advancred upgrades for 2500 T-72s (IA requirement/tender) and interstingly for this td.,a med mil transport aircraft ,obviously with Antonov. The R Co. is going after everything military.
Post Reply