Transport Aircraft for IAF

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 May 2015 09:53

>> While the Il-76MDM upgrade retains the old D-30KP engine

while I am ok with effort to zero-hour the airframes, simplify their outdated electrical and avionic systems (just compare the c17 cockpit to il76) ...we absolutely must get new fuel efficient engines like PS90A as engine servicing, fuel burn and repair contributes a lot to opex and downtime vs any structural or electrical upkeep work.

lets not be taken in by the AL55 type talk.

being rugged russi old school airframes the structure will likely be very strong and capable of the low cycle usage that transport ac have vs the passenger birds that are on the move for 18 hrs a day for weeks.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 May 2015 10:09

Malaysian airlines or rather the Govt has hired a hatchet man from aer lingus to carry out massive reduction and layoffs.

this will mean the selling off or scrapping of all their B747, A380 and B777 fleet by next year whether cargo or pax.
their cargo service mascargo will be totally cancelled.
their remnant fleet will be A330 only and function as a regional east asian airline.

this will also hit hard the massive KL airport operation, which will shrink.

another opportunity for IAF to try its hand at hauling cargo using cheaply purchased commercial airlifters from mascargo.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 May 2015 11:17

For over 20 years the Il-76s have served the IAF very well,without an accident.You can't compare them with brand new C-17s.Plus,take a look at current costs of new Il-476s and new C-17s,compare cost/payload and upgrade cost too. If I remember correctly,one would be able to buy 3 new Il-476s for the cost of one C-17.The Il-476s are only coming off the prod lines now,with 100 on order for Russian mil/civil forces.They were not available when the C-17s were ordered. In the future,with C-17 production closed,we will have to buy/lease second-hand C-17s or buy new Il-476s,now all being built in Russia and not in Uzbekistan as was done with earlier Il-76s,so spares/support will be far easier. The IAF should've ordered a few more C-17s right from the start,but with money in v.short supply,with moolah reqd. for fancy Rafales at $3000M a pop,why crib on a paltry few millions for Il-76 upgrades or in the future acquisitions of much cheaper/cost effective Il-476s?!

PS:I just reckd. the costs,here they are.

In February 2011, the IAF and Boeing agreed terms for the order of 10 C-17s[128] with an option for six more; the US$4.1 billion order was approved by the Indian Cabinet Committee on Security on 6 June 2011

"The contract on the delivery to the Russian Defense Ministry of 39 military-transport planes of a new model Il-76MD-90A (Il-476) with the total cost of 140 billion rubles (approx. $3-4.0B for 39 aircraft) had been signed in October 2012.

This makes the cost of one C-17 vs one IL-476 as approx. $400m to $75/100M .One can get 3-4 UIL-476s for the price of one C-17

The costs speak for themselves.
4 aircraft are being delivered in 2015

Performance/history details also here:
Il-476 CANDID / Il-76MD-90AII-476 variant offers 10% lower fuel burn, and will have an increased maximum takeoff weight of 210t. The new aircraft will have a range of 2,700nm (5,000km) with a 60t payload (C-17,77.5t payload), and can also be operated from paved and unpaved runways with an elevation of up to 9,840ft (3,000m).

PPS:The same glass cockpits on the Il-476s will be used for the Indo-Russian MTA.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 May 2015 14:10

Phillip,

You are wasting your bandwidth. This ought not to be about russia bashing, or east vs west to begin with.

There is no real data available re. use of these craft in open source. The $4++B was fly away cost, the total contract was in exCess of 6B. C17 is now out of production and no real use case of 77.5t load has been shown. The extra 17.5t may or may not buy you anything. Yet, to the most vocal posters anything negative about C17 even about its excessive cost is unacceptable.

On one hand the use of a toyota innova by K Tamilmani to a college function generates a corruption complaint to the defense minister, on the other hand $2-3B is doled out like free flowing water.

Build your own, or be reliant on second hand handouts. The defense production more broadly is likely to be an order of magnitude more corrupt than the current screwdrivergiri by public sector enterprises when the current government is finished with its tinkering. There will be a lot more private "indegenous" material, like the TATA built helicopter cabins, but death of any nascent indegenous design/development capability. At least thats how I see it for now, and in transport there never was any indigenous element.

C17 or 476, its a ransom payment either way. Cant they instead spend the billions on a rail link to Leh, high speed ferries to A&N and call it a day? May be the ordinary public will get to set foot on those without a natural disaster.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 May 2015 14:47

saurabh jha has already alluded that CAG would soon reveal what is the cost india is paying for the c17 global sustainment program.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 06 May 2015 15:17

PPS:The same glass cockpits on the Il-476s will be used for the Indo-Russian MTA.

I don't think you realised how funny and tragic this is on so many levels

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 May 2015 18:59

while I am ok with effort to zero-hour the airframes, simplify their outdated electrical and avionic systems (just compare the c17 cockpit to il76) ...we absolutely must get new fuel efficient engines like PS90A as engine servicing, fuel burn and repair contributes a lot to opex and downtime vs any structural or electrical upkeep work.

1) The Indian IL-76 have gone through an upgrade process - started around 2009 (they all should have completed this by now). Cannot recall what all was done, but the upgrade did extend the life by 10 years
2) The PS90A engine was not considered a good fit (no ROI was the verdict - posted above in one of my posts), so it was not included in the IAF upgrade

This makes the cost of one C-17 vs one IL-476 as approx. $400m to $75/100M .One can get 3-4 UIL-476s for the price of one C-17

IF "cost" was the sole issue, then the Russian planes would have won hands down - no argument. Actually the Russians are upgrading some 49 of their own IL-76MD to IL-76MDMD standards ............ for 1/3 the price of a IL-476. So, the argument, why IL-476 also exists.

There is no real data available re. use of these craft in open source

"use of these craft": By whom? IAF? IAF had no "real data" when they opted for the C-17s. The IAF was not even using it. And even worse is the fact that the IAF was a user of the IL-76 and was offered the IL-476 years prior to the C-17 decision. And, in 2015 are opting for 3 more c-17s. So, what gives? And therefore, why in 2015 all this hue and cry?

I could be wrong, but the decision to go with the C-17 was more than just cost. I tend to lean towards availability of the aircraft being one of the major considerations. And, as I posted above, even today the IL-76MDs do not seem to be highly available. ???????

Having said all that I would be very interested in the CAG report. It should provide us with some info on these machines.

Surya wrote:
PPS:The same glass cockpits on the Il-476s will be used for the Indo-Russian MTA.
I don't think you realised how funny and tragic this is on so many levels

If one takes it serious, there are a few more.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 May 2015 19:54

Shreeman wrote:The $4++B was fly away cost, the total contract was in exCess of 6B.

Err.. no. The flyaway cost is $2.16 billion ($1.78 bn for the aircrafts, $380 mil for the engines).

C17 is now out of production and no real use case of 77.5t load has been shown. The extra 17.5t may or may not buy you anything.

Except that its just not an 'extra 17.5 tons'. The IL-76MD cannot airlift in 60 tons in real world conditions because its cargo volume is the same as its 40 ton lifting predecessor. So, if the C-17 carries only upto 60 tons in practice, a new build IL-76 will lift 30-35 tons. (Unless the cargo consists of bullion or some other highly dense commodity.)

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 May 2015 20:07

Philip wrote:PS:I just reckd. the costs,here they are.

In February 2011, the IAF and Boeing agreed terms for the order of 10 C-17s[128] with an option for six more; the US$4.1 billion order was approved by the Indian Cabinet Committee on Security on 6 June 2011

"The contract on the delivery to the Russian Defense Ministry of 39 military-transport planes of a new model Il-76MD-90A (Il-476) with the total cost of 140 billion rubles (approx. $3-4.0B for 39 aircraft) had been signed in October 2012.

This makes the cost of one C-17 vs one IL-476 as approx. $400m to $75/100M .One can get 3-4 UIL-476s for the price of one C-17
The costs speak for themselves.
4 aircraft are being delivered in 2015

You've got your figure wrong again. As of Oct 2012 when the RUB 140 bn contract for the 39 IL-76s was signed, the exchange rate was 30 rubles to the dollar, putting the flyaway cost of the IL-76 at slightly under $120 mil. (The current cost would be lowered by the shrunken Ruble but then raised again by rampant inflation. Not possible to put a figure to it at this point.)

So for the cost of 1 C-17, you would have gotten at best 2 IL-76s. If the Russian domestic costs are understated as they often are (case in point: Su-30SM v Su-30MKI), the difference might be far smaller. And since the cargo hold of the new model IL-76MD-90A (Il-476) remains unchanged, it still left with only half the lifting capacity of the C-17.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 06 May 2015 20:50

For those who may not be aware, there was a thread specifically for the C-17:

C-17s for the IAF

started in 2009. 99 pages of it.

check out the posters in the early discussion phases and their posts.

Point being, I am sure pretty much everything - outside of the latest news items - have been discussed.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 07 May 2015 07:53

^^^ NRao ji thank you for that link. Read a few posts, will read a lot more.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 May 2015 08:09

Ha!Ha! With more powerful engines an aircraft can easily lift a greater load. No transport aircraft is stuffed to the gills covering every sq. inch with a load.This is a juvenile line of argument. The aircraft's performance will speak for itself. the costs are easily available in numerous reports.It is at least 3 Il-476s for one C-17. If we order 2 more Phalcon AWACS,being considered,the new IL476 will be the platform.

The IL-476s weren't available when the C-17 deal was finalised,Snake-Oil doing his bit as part of the N-deal. No grouse about that,he was the PM at the time,but it was a lower priority than sealing the MMRCA deal.The Q is options for future heavy transports when the C-17 line is closed down.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 07 May 2015 10:18

Philip wrote:Ha!Ha! With more powerful engines an aircraft can easily lift a greater load. No transport aircraft is stuffed to the gills covering every sq. inch with a load.This is a juvenile line of argument.

Its a silly argument you're making Philip and I suspect you know it. Our existing IL-76s rarely ever carry anything close to 40 tons of cargo. The one time it did, it went off like a particularly nasty prostate exam (T-72 airlift).

The typical cargo hold always gets 'filled up' before it gets 'weighed down'. So how do you propose to stuff more into new IL-76MD despite it having the same dimensions as the currently operational type?

The aircraft's performance will speak for itself. the costs are easily available in numerous reports.It is at least 3 Il-476s for one C-17.

Cost are indeed easily available - just two scrolls above this post.

- $120 mil to $220 mil as of 2012. That's less than 2 Il-476s for one C-17.

If we order 2 more Phalcon AWACS,being considered,the new IL476 will be the platform.

The fact that the IAF has dead opposed to the IL-76 for more Phalcons as well as the DRDO AWACS project, says something about the reliability of the platform. Clearly not something it wants to risk for a system as expensive and critical as an AWACS.

The IL-476s weren't available when the C-17 deal was finalised

That's not what you were saying when the whole C-17 debate was going on.

The Q is options for future heavy transports when the C-17 line is closed down.

Given that each C-17 effectively lifts twice as much as an Il-76, a fleet of 13 C-17s confer far greater heavy lift capability than we had with 17 Il-76s. In addition to that we have the option of the 2 remaining white-tail C-17s as well as surplus units from USAF stocks. And a fleet of very capable medium lifters (read: C-130J) to supplement that.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 May 2015 10:34

Ha!Ha! With more powerful engines an aircraft can easily lift a greater load.

A plane does not fly only on engines. With a more powerful engine, you will ALSO need to increase the structural capacity to carry a larger load. Else we re where we are as far as "load" in concerned. A more powerful engine MAY take us a longer distance.

And, if you are suggesting engine + structure - that is what the Russians are doing (as far as I can understand it) for the IL-76MD to IL-76MDM upgrade - at 1/3rd the cost of a IL-476.

No transport aircraft is stuffed to the gills covering every sq. inch with a load.This is a juvenile line of argument.

True, which is why the other poster's constant request to see operational data is invalid. You just cannot compare historic loads that were carried by any transport and come to any meaningful conclusion.

However, to allow comparisons there is no harm in assuming that the planes are filled to the gills. That way one gets standardized numbers - that can be used to "compare". Much as we do with ...................................... mpg numbers on new cars ----- we use them to compare and do not rely on those number (users will get different numbers).

The aircraft's performance will speak for itself.

You have not responded to why the IAF opted out of the IL-76 and IL-476 when they had very clear offers - before the C-17 even came into the picture.

Still waiting.

the costs are easily available in numerous reports.

Nope. They are not.

The "costs" that are reported thsu far are for the Russian MoD and not for an export customer. Bet they will be much higher - they got to be, IL is in the business of making money.

It is at least 3 Il-476s for one C-17.

That is ONLY on the basis of cost of the planes that you have assumed. Standardize it over other factors and that is not the ratio we get. Since the IAF has only the IL-76MD in its inventory we can compare only that plane to the C-17 and there are two of us who get one C-17 = about 2.5 IL-76MDs.

If we order 2 more Phalcon AWACS,being considered,the new IL476 will be the platform

Do you have a link for that?

I very much doubt that. The IL-476 based AWACS (A-100) comes out in 2017 - at the very earliest. So, if India were to wait for the IL-476 she will get her AWACS - I assume - somewhere around 2020+ - more like 2022.

However, what about this:?

IAF to Buy Two Airbus A330-based AWACS

The programme entails the use of Airbus A330, a much more versatile and capable aircraft than the current in use IL-76 platform to develop the Indian version of the AWACS with similar or even better capabilities than the Israeli Phalcon system.

So, why has India opted out of the IL series for the Indian AWACS program?

Just as they had, the IAF and ALL have the numbers in front of them. And, yet they have opted for a non-IL platform.

So, seriously, trying to learn something here, what gives?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 May 2015 15:04

The ~~mta~~ An-178 has flown

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 May 2015 15:43

The IL-214 MTA is flying strongly as well - in the display hall http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... l_MRTA.JPG

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 May 2015 16:04

An-178 is a nice aircraft and less risky option than MTA but IAF rejected as it could just carry 15 T

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 09 May 2015 16:26

Cant find the article, but recently it has emerged that ICG has decided to club its MPA requirement with the avro replacement project. So the numbers will increase beyond 56.

Perhaps the availability of C295 will subsidize the absence of mythical MTAs.

Lets hope this deal culminates into the acquition of C295 via make in India route. IMHO navy should also jump in and acquire these at some point as well.

Regarding the A330 AEW: Is this a Phalcon option project or a new DRDO one?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 May 2015 16:48

video taken from juhu beach of the C130 that landed and took off as a proving exercise

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nt1AY6 ... 4227083903

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 09 May 2015 17:03

Singha wrote:video taken from juhu beach of the C130 that landed and took off as a proving exercise

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nt1AY6 ... 4227083903

This one is a keeper

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 May 2015 17:18

I think they were testing if out if some jihadi 'swarm' attack manages to hit some key points in and around sahar to render it inoperational or part of ongoing fight, and then go berserk all over the town like say 15 detachments of 4 people each, all armed with LMGs, 1000 rds ammo, rations, explosives, radios ...., if heavy reinforcements could be inducted via juhu also.

mumbai is a much easier target for this LeT wet dream than delhi for a variety of reasons - easier to reach via sea, compact geography, 'softer' targets vs delhi where police presence is more heavy, more far flung, a huge cantonment parked in the middle

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 09 May 2015 17:28

Deleted by self

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 May 2015 18:00

That is the Old Juhu/Pawan Hans airport seen Do-228 land/take off from there and Mi-17 are the usual guest and sometimes ALH but good to see C-130 land there too

sumsumne · Post by **sumsumne** » 09 May 2015 20:20

Airbus military plane crashes near Spain's Seville airport

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32673713

The plane, a new Airbus A400M, reportedly developed a fault just after take-off on a test flight.

RIP

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 09 May 2015 21:17

Are there any plans for IAF to acquire more C-130J planes? We are now down to 11 since after that crash.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 09 May 2015 22:36

Hitesh wrote:Are there any plans for IAF to acquire more C-130J planes? We are now down to 11 since after that crash.

Replacement has been ordered.

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... force.html
"One more C-130J is on order to replace the unit which crashed in early 2014 near Gwalior"

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 10 May 2015 07:05

Saudi Arabia To Build Antonov Cargo Planes
According to Al-Saud, the evolved Antonov-32 will have an extended range and is designed for military and civilian operations.

"Its range will be doubled or more and the kingdom will participate in developing new specifications for the aircraft to co-own this technology with the Antonov company," he said.

"The new Saudi-Ukrainian aircraft will be designed with Western engines from Canada, navigation systems from American company Honeywell, as well as other parts that will be acquired from the UK," he added...

May be those 6 can come back from KSA?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 13 May 2015 22:05

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 18m18 minutes ago

DAC has cleared TASL's Avro replacement bid. India will get its second aerospace OEM.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 13 May 2015 22:21

Airbus Wins $1.87 Billion Indian Military Order for Cargo Planes

by N C BipindraAnurag Kotoky
May 13, 2015

India agreed to buy 56 transport aircraft from Airbus Group NV for 119.3 billion rupees ($1.87 billion) to replace an aging fleet, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeks to modernize the country’s military.
The C-295 planes, which will replace Avro cargo planes in the Indian Air Force fleet, will be jointly built with India’s Tata Advanced Systems Ltd., an Indian government official said in New Delhi late Wednesday, asking not to be identified in accord with policy. Sixteen of the aircraft will be manufactured at Airbus plants in Europe, while the rest will be made in India.
Since coming to office one year ago, Modi’s government has approved military projects valued at more than $40 billion, as India moves to catch up with an assertive China, which spends thrice that amount in military purchases every year. Modi has allowed more foreign investment in defense and is trying to overcome a history of graft scandals that slowed purchases.
In addition to the transport plane order, India’s Defense Acquisition Council approved other orders Wednesday valued at at least $875 million. They include 145 BAE Systems Plc M777 howitzers, Indo-Russian BrahMos cruise missiles for six warships and 197 Russian Kamov helicopters. The helicopters will be manufactured in India.
The council also approved the construction of India’s second domestically built aircraft carrier.
The helicopters, like the local manufacture of the 40 Airbus transport planes are part of a plan to stoke domestic production after India surpassed China to become the world’s largest importer of weapons. Modi is also seeking to rely less on state-run companies that have failed to help replace obsolete military equipment.
The announcement of the transport plane order comes less than a week after an Airbus A400 transport plane crashed in Seville, Spain several minutes into a test flight prior to delivery to Turkey. The incident has prompted air forces across Europe to suspend use of the A400 while the investigation of the crash occurs.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... rgo-planes

Ka-226 also bagged the order. Happy to see C-295 deal being signed. Good boost to private industry.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 13 May 2015 22:59

C-295 is much more capable than both Avro HS-748(payload - 5 tons) & An-32 (payload - 7.5 tons). Its payload is around 9 tons, while the airframe is much more optimized as its a recent aircraft. The engines too are pretty good and fuel efficient.

C-295 is a good buy and should eventually replace all Avros and An-32s. Hopefully, order will grow to around 150+ given that both HS-748 and An-32s need to be replaced. The An-32s underwent a major upgrade recently. But given the Ukraine situation, not all aircrafts were updated in Ukraine. Many were supposed to be upgraded in IAF's BRDs. Wonder what the status is. Is Antonov supplying all the materials for upgrades at BRDs? Or is the upgrade stuck now?

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 13 May 2015 23:09

putnanja wrote:C-295 is much more capable than both Avro HS-748(payload - 5 tons) & An-32 (payload - 7.5 tons). Its payload is around 9 tons, while the airframe is much more optimized as its a recent aircraft. The engines too are pretty good and fuel efficient.

C-295 is a good buy and should eventually replace all Avros and An-32s. Hopefully, order will grow to around 150+ given that both HS-748 and An-32s need to be replaced. The An-32s underwent a major upgrade recently. But given the Ukraine situation, not all aircrafts were updated in Ukraine. Many were supposed to be upgraded in IAF's BRDs. Wonder what the status is. Is Antonov supplying all the materials for upgrades at BRDs? Or is the upgrade stuck now?

I agree. Eventually the An-32's will be replaced as well. In one swoop, most of the transport market is headed into private hands. I'm hoping the 226 deal is the last major deal we give to the Russians. If Dassault partners with a private it will be one more punch to the PSU setup.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 May 2015 00:24

How many An-32s are there in IAF?

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 14 May 2015 01:11

ramana wrote:How many An-32s are there in IAF?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-32

Indian Air Force: Bought 125 aircraft, 105 are still in service. Entire fleet is undergoing modernization; 35 upgraded An-32s have been delivered by Ukrspetsexport. The upgrades include modern avionics equipment, new oxygen systems and improved crew seats. The remaining aircraft are being upgraded in India.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 14 May 2015 01:22

The remaining aircraft are supposed to be upgraded in India. Not sure if it has started yet. There are also around 5 AN-32s stuck in Ukraine that went there for upgrade due to the fighting. Not sure if they came back yet or not

raj-senthil · Post by **raj-senthil** » 14 May 2015 05:44

Avro aircraft deal: Defence council clears Rs 11,930 cr Tata-Airbus bid

Breaking the deadlock over the long-pending Avro transport aircraft deal for the Indian Air Force, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) on Wednesday cleared the lone bid of Rs 11,930 crore by Tata-Airbus consortium for the joint production of transport aircraft.
The project was stuck due to the single vendor situation despite being cleared last year. While 16 aircraft will be bought in fly-away condition, 40 will be made in India.....

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 14 May 2015 05:58

I thought An 32 payload was a bit higher

not that it matters because max loads were probably not carried
maybe a stretched version might replace them

With the Ukie situation the AN 32 status bothers me most

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 14 May 2015 06:35

Surya wrote:I thought An 32 payload was a bit higher
not that it matters because max loads were probably not carried
maybe a stretched version might replace themWith the Ukie situation the AN 32 status bothers me most

Hope TATA manufacture few gunship version of C295. We will need it to keep Paki refugee away from land border.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 May 2015 08:55

Antonov just flew their MTA type plane for the 1st time this week. so that part of Ukr is functioning safely. ofcourse their ability to ship parts and teach HAL how to do the upg is a matter of concern.

mody · Post by **mody** » 14 May 2015 12:30

I hope beyond the 56 aircrafts ordered, Tata-Airbus can come with a stretched version with higher thrust engines to take the payload capacity to about 12 tons. They can make another 100 of these stretched versions from 2022-23 onwards (approx to finish development and complete the current order). We can start retiring the AN32s from 2025 onwards once these new baby's start coming online.

Don't like the Ka-226 deal. The LuH is very close to its first flight. Why go for full import when domestic capacity exists. Could have ordered another 50 odd Mi-17 V5 instead to keep the russians happy.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 14 May 2015 16:19

Finally! I hope the contract doesn't take too long. Decisions are being taken but MoD still has a long way to go to speed up actual contracts.