Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2159
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by eklavya »

nachiket wrote:I don't think the IAF is buying the Chinook with a view to supplying Siachen anyway.
What is the expected mission of the IAF CH-47s? 15 is such a small number ... barely 3 more than the AW101s for the VVIP squadron.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

Mostly heavy lift at high altitudes. Boeing quotes the Chinook's effort during disaster relief in Pakistan at high altitudes as being proof of its high altitude payload capabilities.

link
Over the years, Chinooks have performed rescues in high altitude conditions:

Routine Chinook military operations in support of NATO ground troops in the Shahi Khot region of Afghanistan, at altitudes of 8,500 feet.
Two Chinooks are based at Mt. McKinley, Alaska for SAR missions. Mt. McKinley is the highest peak in North American, exceeding 20,000 feet.
US Army Chinooks were sent to the high Himalayas in 2005 to support relief operations following the massive Pakistan earthquake in October of that year. Chinooks delivered 94 tons medical supplies, 1,939 tons of humanitarian supplies, 1,582 tons of equipment, and evacuated 15,794 victims from altitudes at which other helicopters could carry only minimal payload.
and as for the mission of the Chinook, this is what Boeing states
Its primary mission is to move troops, artillery, ammunition, fuel, water, barrier materials, supplies and equipment on the battlefield. Its secondary missions include medical evacuation, disaster relief, search and rescue, aircraft recovery, fire fighting, parachute drops, heavy construction and civil development.
So there you go, thats what the CH-47F Chinook will do when in IAF service. You can also go through the CH-47 overview pdf that quotes a service ceiling of 20,000 ft for the CH-47F variant.

What will be interesting to see is the avionics fit on the IAF's CH-47F. Australian CH-47Fs feature the EADS AN/AAR-60 MILDS missile warning system, and I'm hoping that this equipment is there on the IAF's version too. There is a Special Forces version of the Chinook, the MH-47E which has other equipment (the ATK AN/AAR-47 missile warning system, Northrop Grumman ALQ-162 Shadowbox jammer, ITT ALQ-136(V) pulse jammer, Raytheon APR-39A radar warner and chaff and flare dispenser) that it needs to allow safe insertion and extraction of special forces troops. I don't think that we'll be getting any of those except the chaff and flare dispensers.
Last edited by Kartik on 31 Oct 2012 03:46, edited 1 time in total.
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vivek_ahuja »

There were also some reports long back when the CH-47 idea came up that the IAF was looking for specialist helicopters for CSAR roles similar to MH-47s in the US Military. A good portion of these helicopters might well come slotted for that role. It might be interesting to see what equipment listing comes with the helicopters. That should elucidate the roles quite clearly.

-Vivek
Last edited by vivek_ahuja on 31 Oct 2012 04:18, edited 1 time in total.
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vivek_ahuja »

Kartik wrote:Mostly heavy lift at high altitudes.
I would think that should be Heavy Lift at ALL altitudes. :mrgreen:
eklavya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2159
Joined: 16 Nov 2004 23:57

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by eklavya »

^^^^

Kartik, Vivek: many thanks for the answers. Truly a versatile machine. Carries 11t day and night and to high altitudes ... good flexibility to have at all times. Combined with the new Mi-17s, should make for a much more flexible response (especially in hilly areas) to whatever the situation demands.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

vivek_ahuja wrote:
Kartik wrote:Mostly heavy lift at high altitudes.
I would think that should be Heavy Lift at ALL altitudes. :mrgreen:
heavy lift at high altitude would automatically translate into heavy lift at lower altitudes..unless principles of physics that relate to lift generated in thin air have changed somehow. :wink:
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

vivek_ahuja wrote:There were also some reports long back when the CH-47 idea came up that the IAF was looking for specialist helicopters for CSAR roles similar to MH-47s in the US Military. A good portion of these helicopters might well come slotted for that role. It might be interesting to see what equipment listing comes with the helicopters. That should elucidate the roles quite clearly.

-Vivek
indeed..I've been monitoring DSCA notices but nothing so far on the CH-47F for India..the equipment list on that notification would let us know if these CH-47Fs will be used for special forces ops or not.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

Combat Aviation magazine had a small news snippet about Hungarian Fulcrums that are for sale..

As per the snippet, Hungary is doing its best to sell the the MiG-29s. The national press has not identified potential buyers but Croatia is considered a likely customer. Hungary negotiated with Russia to secure approval for re-export and paid for an independent inspection of its 24 MiG-29s and 71 RD-33 engines by a team of 12 inspectors from MiG Corp. They reported that four of the fighters remain operational, four require a simple inspection and four could fly after replacing some parts. Of the remaining 12, four could be returned to airworthiness while the remaining 8 would be best as a source of parts- although they could all be made airworthy after a overhaul.

During their service with the Hungarian Air Force, just 2 logged 1400 hours of flight time (my guess is those were MiG-29UBs), but most have between 200 to 700 flight hours only!
That's less than 10-20% of their service life used..a similar situation to what happened with the Qatari Mirage-2000-5s that had 80-85% of their service lives remaining.

Hungary initially tried to sell the fighters in 2011, but the lack of a Russian end-user certificate is what is believed to have limited interest. They were officially retired from service on Dec8, 2010 and are stored at Kecskemet.

Now, with such low service hours, these MiG-29s are eminently suitable to be bought at what would be surely very low up-front costs, possibly around $5-10 million apiece. Then if the IAF paid MiG, they could put them through the UPG upgrade (costing another $15 million apiece including new RD-33 Ser3 engines) and overhaul and raise a full strength 4th MiG-29UPG squadron at what would be the cheapest and fastest route to another multi-role squadron. For $25 million per unit or perhaps even lower, the IAF will get Fulcrums with more hours on their airframe than any other Fulcrum in current IAF service. And since we'll already be operating this type till 2025-30 at least, this will be a truly worthwhile investment and at least in part arrest the decline in squadron numbers.

Since I've never heard of MoD interest in any such MiG-29s available for sale, my guess is that such common sense is lacking out there or there are other issues that I'm not aware of. But if Pakistan, Chile and a host of other F-16 operating nations can do it, quickly raising F-16 squadrons from either operational second-hand airframes or stored airframes that are quickly refurbished, then why can't India?
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vasu raya »

gnair wrote:In airfields, that have fixed-wing and rotary operations, the helicopter hovers just above the ground, to the active runway and then climbs to its initial altitude, just like a fixed wing aircraft would taxi from the apron to the taxi way and then the active runway for departure into the circuit. Each airfield has its unique departure and arrival procedures that must be followed, and is available in the airfield chart that the pilot must be aware about. If you re-look at sections of the clip, you'd notice an asphalt runway in the background, while he's climbing.
Thanks gnair, while the context makes sense, still not clear on why would they graze the skids on the grass rather than fly just above like on Asphalt, usually no aircraft deviates into the grass area in civil air stations
vivek_ahuja wrote:The various helicopter ceilings are defined on the basis of Rate of Climb (ROC) rates for helicopters globally as a uniform figure of merit. The two main figures to note are the Service Ceiling and the Combat Ceilings.

Service Ceiling: Ability of helicopter to provide at least 0.5m/sec ROC
Combat Ceiling: Ability of helicopter to provide at least 2.5m/sec ROC (Indian Minimum ROC requirement for military uses)

So the Chinook might be able to offer a service ceiling of 5640m as advertised, but it is in all certainty the ceiling classified in forward flight (and also in stripped down condition with minimum required fuel for these evaluations). Hover Ceiling (within In-Ground Effect (IGE) or Out of ground Effect (OGE)) is usually much lower. Take a look at the plots on my blog here:

http://mach-five.blogspot.com/2012/04/h ... harts.html
Vivek, thanks for taking the time to respond, the lift charts do show the limitations, Wiki states that the V-22 Osprey engines RR T406 might be used in the Chinook as an upgrade, the CH-53 and the engines' derivative in the future air cushioned mechanized landing craft.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

If our sf units are using mi17v now, the chinook looks a better fit due to the comprehensive jsoc avionics available for blind flying and countermeasures. The mi17v might be used better for transport role.

When our own jsoc tri service comes up i have feeling they will go with mix of dhruv, chinooks and the sea king replacement.
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vivek_ahuja »

Singha wrote:If our sf units are using mi17v now, the chinook looks a better fit due to the comprehensive jsoc avionics available for blind flying and countermeasures. The mi17v might be used better for transport role.

When our own jsoc tri service comes up i have feeling they will go with mix of dhruv, chinooks and the sea king replacement.
I wouldn't dismiss the Mi-17-1V (The High altitude version with TV3-117VM Engines + gunship capability) casually. It is a very competitive (if not better) high altitude performer than its peers worldwide. The 117VM engines are designed for high altitude performance as opposed to the baseline 117M engine (which in itself is a very decent high altitude performer). At low altitudes, I can see the Chinook performing better. But all in all, I think the Mi-17 is here to stay.

-Vivek
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by shiv »

As far as I can tell the Chinooks will play a specialized role hitherto filled by the Mi 6 Hook. This would be to lift extra heavy loads - like bulldozers etc to clear blocked roads or help with construction of tunnels/roads. Also to deliver extra large quantities of supplies to areas that cannot be reached every day. Entire modular units like field hospitals or maybe radars and artillery an be airlifted. These would be one-off jobs unlike what the Mi 17s do. The role of the Mi 17 is day to day hard work. Daily supplies, casevac etc.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by nachiket »

shiv wrote:As far as I can tell the Chinooks will play a specialized role hitherto filled by the Mi 6 Hook. This would be to lift extra heavy loads - like bulldozers etc to clear blocked roads or help with construction of tunnels/roads. Also to deliver extra large quantities of supplies to areas that cannot be reached every day. Entire modular units like field hospitals or maybe radars and artillery an be airlifted. These would be one-off jobs unlike what the Mi 17s do. The role of the Mi 17 is day to day hard work. Daily supplies, casevac etc.
You mean the Mi-26 Halo. We have only 3 left now after one crashed a couple of years ago.

The confusing thing is, we have determined the Boeing to be the L-1 bidder according to the news article. Fine. But how do they account for the fact that the competitor - Mi-26T2 can carry a lot more than the Chinook both internally as well as underslung? It is obviously going to be more expensive since it is substantially larger.
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by vivek_ahuja »

nachiket wrote:The confusing thing is, we have determined the Boeing to be the L-1 bidder according to the news article. Fine. But how do they account for the fact that the competitor - Mi-26T2 can carry a lot more than the Chinook both internally as well as underslung? It is obviously going to be more expensive since it is substantially larger.
I think they go by the minimum specified performance plus a multiplier for any performance beyond that. But these weighting factors are different for different categories. In other words, the advantage the Mi-26T2 may have gained by exceeding the payload capacity beyond the minimum specified might not have been offset by the penalty it pays for high operating cost over its lifetime compared to the Chinook. The net evaluation quantification is the weighted sum of these indices.

Of course, this assumes fair play and all. Once politics enters the room, performance quantification etc fly out of the window.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by shiv »

nachiket wrote:
The confusing thing is, we have determined the Boeing to be the L-1 bidder according to the news article. Fine. But how do they account for the fact that the competitor - Mi-26T2 can carry a lot more than the Chinook both internally as well as underslung? It is obviously going to be more expensive since it is substantially larger.
Maybe they don't need to carry the loads that the Mi 26 carries. They only need to carry certain specific loads. Apart from that, safety and reliability issues and lifetime costs are details that we do not get to know about. It may be less of an issue of "whose is bigger?" and more of "What do I need?"

We also don't know what are the specific loads the IAF needs carrying on a regular basis. If an Mi 26 is needed to carry a bigger load as one off - the existing ones may serve the purpose for the next few years. After that they can still go in for a new buy if need be.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

I am very much a strong supporter of the Mi17v, but are you sure we are getting ours with the next-gen engine? iirc it was the chinese production line which was planning to use the new more powerful engine.

also my point was not about the high-alt cargo perf of Mi17v which will be better than chinook the higher we get, but about the comprehensive and integrated suite of countermeasures and nav gear from the MH47 (should we get it for our tri-services JSOC upcoming) vs the more cobbled together and austere kit in our "normal" helos like the Mi17. the Mi17 too at additional expense could be given a comprehensive suite like the LCH if it were to be chosen as the desi-JSOC medium heli. just flares dispenser is not enough.

vast majority of mountain SF missions will not be at extreme high alt, but probably between 8000-15000ft range in J&K , Leh, Sikkim, Arunachal. and d-JSOC will operate over TSP and the sea as well. chinook scores there, being a SEAL/ranger/Delta delivery vehicle for decades now.

another wild card could be the MH60G nighthawk variant with huge rockets packs & outrigger canoe fuel tanks like the turkish and US army uses.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9nlL3h8Voxw/T ... 0/MH60.jpg
http://www.americanspecialops.com/image ... 0l-dap.jpg

those outrigger tanks and retractable refueling probe should permit really deep "surprise" missions. it would need a C130 with drogue system to AAR though.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Surya »

squadrons from either operational second-hand airframes or stored airframes that are quickly refurbished, then why can't India?
The eternal question we have been askign for last 2 decades

how come everyone else seem to manage other solutions and we go for super duper costly additions
D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by D Roy »

yup for all of Israel's hi tech military yada yada they converted numerous sherman's into ARM launchers and what not. But in the Indian military there is a turn towards new stuff whenever there is money as is the case now.

From what some air phorce wallahs say when discussing things like acquiring old soveit stock helos, or older mirages etc , it often turns out that the price asked is too high ( hey you could say that about the M2k upg as well) and in the end you may get a lemon i.e it is just not worth it in the air domain. As in these apparently less used airframes turn up with some very real problems because they just weren't used properly to begin with.

this is what some of them say.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sanku »

Well given the Groshkov saga -- where everyone ends up with a egg on their face and a bad rap -- you cant blame any one for not jumping for second hand maal as and when it gets available.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by nachiket »

Weren't the Qatari Mirages rejected because the price asked was too high (almost as much as new ones)? This may not be a problem with the Hungarian Migs though.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by shiv »

Surya wrote:
squadrons from either operational second-hand airframes or stored airframes that are quickly refurbished, then why can't India?
The eternal question we have been askign for last 2 decades

how come everyone else seem to manage other solutions and we go for super duper costly additions
Surya there is a flip side to this observation. The Hungarian air force with these MiG 29s has quickly moved from MiG 21s to 29s to Gripens. India is still using MiG 21s. We have refurbished and revised and reinvigorated everything to the limit in order to maintain one of the biggest air forces in the world - so strictly speaking it is not true to say that we do not use old airframes.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Surya »

Shiv

actually the correct example where we did like this was Mig 21 Us and Mig 23 UBs. normal 21s was more a whole upgrade which we have done but topping up and reusing exisitng stuff is diff

like are we converting our old 21s to drones? did we do a feasibility study of it??

in those cases we did scour the old Soviet republics and pick up some stuff

but we dithered too long on the M2Ks and Harriers - and now maybe 29s

likewise I never understood the army's plan to sell the centurions to a country which was planning to refurbish and use and the Israelis who were still using it.

there are more such examples
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

D Roy wrote:yup for all of Israel's hi tech military yada yada they converted numerous sherman's into ARM launchers and what not. But in the Indian military there is a turn towards new stuff whenever there is money as is the case now.

From what some air phorce wallahs say when discussing things like acquiring old soveit stock helos, or older mirages etc , it often turns out that the price asked is too high ( hey you could say that about the M2k upg as well) and in the end you may get a lemon i.e it is just not worth it in the air domain. As in these apparently less used airframes turn up with some very real problems because they just weren't used properly to begin with.

this is what some of them say.
That is actually not likely to happen because the AF evaluates the airframes that are bought second hand before purchasing them. For the Qatari Mirages, there was no question of them being lemons since they were more advanced than the ones we operate and had been sparingly used till then. The Qataris were also willing to sell spares and 500 MICA missiles, a number that is even bigger than what we're purchasing now for the entire 51 Mirage fleet.

For the MiG-29s, the IAF could just purchase them and put them through the UPG upgrade. It is already planning to do that for the 2 Mirages that have been lost in accidents since the upgrade contract was signed. Buy used Mirage-2000Ds and then put them through the -5Mk2 upgrade. So why not do the same for the Hungarian MiGs? It's the quickest and cheapest way to stand up a squadron of an existing type to address dwindling squadron numbers.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

nachiket wrote:Weren't the Qatari Mirages rejected because the price asked was too high (almost as much as new ones)? This may not be a problem with the Hungarian Migs though.
On the contrary, the price was nominal. The Mirages had 80-85% of their service life intact (as stated by the Def Min in parliament) and were to be sold with spares and 500 MICA missiles. We're paying more than that entire contract value for just 400 MICA missiles now! When you take into account that they were well maintained, sparingly used Mirages, the $375 million offer for 12 Mirages was a clear signal that India was not interested in really purchasing those but was using that as a stalling tactic to prevent them from being sold to Pakistan. A very very poor decision by the MoD since we could've bought those, added 8-10 more Mirages from France itself, and put those 8-10 through the -5Mk2 upgrade to get 4 squadrons of up-to-date Mirages. Plus, we could've reduced the expense of buying new MICA missiles by buying a much smaller number of new MICAs.

Honestly, there is no excuse for the MoD and IAF not thinking in ways that are cost effective and still address their dwindling squadrons issue.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sanku »

kartik, the problem is that all "well maintained, hardly used" looks good on paper, but without a significant assessment by IAF, its difficult to know for sure, and god only knows if some one goofs up or misses something.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

Sanku wrote:kartik, the problem is that all "well maintained, hardly used" looks good on paper, but without a significant assessment by IAF, its difficult to know for sure, and god only knows if some one goofs up or misses something.
the Mirages were assessed by IAF officers (and had entered service just a few years before that) and the MiG-29s have been inspected by MiG officials with their recommendations mentioned in my first post on this subject. Besides, I'm suggesting that if the MiGs are bought, they be put through the UPG upgrade anyway. That would take care of the deep overhaul required for a few of those airframes and bring them to the same spec as the MiG-29UPGs we'll operate for another 15 years.

I'm not advocating buying every type of equipment second hand, but for a specific issue relating to the dropping squadron strength, and where the indigenous alternative is still some way off from entering service, the best way to arrest it is to either order more new-build MKIs (which cost a heck of a lot more over their lifetime due to their size) or purchase as a stop-gap measure, cheap second-hand airframes of the other 2 modern types in service which have extensive training/logistics/ground infrastructure already in place at HAL as well as air bases. I mean where will you find MiG-29s with 200/700 hours on their airframes? That's nearly like those brand new Fulcrums that were stored since the breakup of the USSR (and which have since been all sold off)- and since Hungary has to get rid of them ASAP or end up paying for storing them, the price will be cheap.

The biggest problem appears to be that the MoD is absolutely incapable of taking any decisions quickly. By the time a proposal is made, goes through the byzantine processes and bureaucrats and a decision is taken, the time has passed and some other solution is needed- which also goes through the same loops.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

Airbus A-330 is L1 in the tanker transport contest !

link
NEW DELHI — Airbus has been selected as the preferred vendor over Russia’s Ilyushin to supply six aerial tankers for the Indian Air Force in a $1 billion tender, according to Indian Defence Ministry officials.

After the commercial bids were opened earlier this month, the base price of the Russian Il-78 tanker was quoted as lower than that of the A330, but when factoring in maintenance and fuel costs, the Airbus was the better value, said a Defence Ministry official. The official refused to provide the exact quotes of the bids, and said the Russian government-owned company had not yet been officially informed about the decision.

Russian diplomats confirmed they had not been informed of the Airbus selection.

..

The Indian Air Force is using six Il-78 midair refuelers bought from Uzbekistan and plans to buy 12 additional tankers, which includes the six from Airbus.

Defence Ministry sources said it is not yet decided if a fresh tender will be opened to buy the remaining six or if a repeat order will be given to the winner to the current competition.
(total buffoons in the MoD if they want another tender for six! maybe they'll diversify further by including the KC-46 in the next tender..:X)
..

The Indian Air Force plans to deploy the tankers at Panagarh Air Base in the eastern state of West Bengal to help increase the range of its Su-30MKI fighter jets, which would enable the Indian aircraft to penetrate deeply into China, an Air Force official said.


In addition to lower fuel costs, the Airbus tanker is optimized for high-altitude cruise and fitted with advance avionics, the IAF official said.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by nachiket »

^^That is great news if true. I'll to wait for the Indian press to report it to be sure. And I agree with your opinion about MoD babus being buffoons for considering another tender for the next six.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Cybaru »

nachiket wrote:Weren't the Qatari Mirages rejected because the price asked was too high (almost as much as new ones)? This may not be a problem with the Hungarian Migs though.

Might be cheaper to order in new MKI's for the same price rather than buy and then have em upgraded them in france..
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9102
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by nachiket »

^^They are newer models which won't have to be upgraded. Their operating costs will also be much lower than the much larger MKIs.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

Cybaru wrote:
nachiket wrote:Weren't the Qatari Mirages rejected because the price asked was too high (almost as much as new ones)? This may not be a problem with the Hungarian Migs though.

Might be cheaper to order in new MKI's for the same price rather than buy and then have em upgraded them in france..
Why upgrade them at all? They were Mirage-2000-5s in the first place. And if some system commonality is a factor, then those changes can be done at HAL which will have the facilities for upgrading the Mirages.

Besides, the operating cost of a Mirage-2000 vs the much larger twin engined MKI over 15-20 years would make this a much cheaper option.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

with the J31 flying, a dose of realism and high funding/resources need to be injected into the AMCA program to move it from "science project" to a "deliverable product" mode.
all concerned from PMO down to ACMs need to get with the reality and pave the way by holding timely reviews and setting realistic goals, avoiding brochure derived bells n whistles like no HUD. fighters have flown fine for decades with a HUD, if they want a wide angle HUD and HDTV can be provided but avoid poking ungli in areas where Unkil is already known to be in grief.

and this time design the aircraft after selecting both a existing (interim) engine and a realistic future engine, not the other way around! one channel could be M88-3 -> kaveri_snecma but that program is low on details with no published milestones yet. another channel could be GE414-EDE as both interim and final engine considering it will be in service on hornets for 3 decades more.

a fighter AESA radar also needs to be worked out asap, even it means cobbling a AESA front end to the EL2032/desi back end.

Astra project has been languishing with no delivery or IOC know. Astra mk2 with enhanced range is needed but even mk1 is nowhere to be seen.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10195
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by sum »

Defence Ministry sources said it is not yet decided if a fresh tender will be opened to buy the remaining six or if a repeat order will be given to the winner to the current competition.
Should one laugh or cry at this? :-?
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Sanku »

Kartik wrote: The biggest problem appears to be that the MoD is absolutely incapable of taking any decisions quickly. By the time a proposal is made, goes through the byzantine processes and bureaucrats and a decision is taken, the time has passed and some other solution is needed- which also goes through the same loops.
That of course I fully agree on, that is the root issue no doubt. However given the current political and other scenario, this is now inevitable.

Even if well meaning, a babu will think twice or thrice about getting into any deal, and particularly one such as buying a tranche of used a/c (lot of issues, how the tender would be done, special exemption needed for multi-vendor tendering, what if things go wrong)

Our system is not just built in a way to effectively pick up such opportunities.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by merlin »

sum wrote:
Defence Ministry sources said it is not yet decided if a fresh tender will be opened to buy the remaining six or if a repeat order will be given to the winner to the current competition.
Should one laugh or cry at this? :-?
Cry. Looks like MoD will do its best to ensure the India loses the next war.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Singha »

I believe it can carry upto 110 tons of fuel and offload as much of it as it needs to (while retaining enough to fly back itself). plus 8 mil pallets for 45t of cargo if need be.

huge force multiplier esp for stuff like Awacs and EMB145 to keep station longer. plus economy of scale in that a single A330 can refuel units of patrolling a/c at multiple points
and fly back deep into the rear. a single plane could fly from kalaikunda, refuel 8 planes over eastern assam, and deftly refuel another 8 over chicken neck before going back...16x5t = 80 with 30t left for itself. Vivek sir's constant "BARCAP" patrols of MKIs and Mig29s will definitely be enabled by this bird.

we need to quit being indic and order the next 6 immediately by bulking it up as 6+6 in tranche1 itself.
Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Will »

sum wrote:
Defence Ministry sources said it is not yet decided if a fresh tender will be opened to buy the remaining six or if a repeat order will be given to the winner to the current competition.
Should one laugh or cry at this? :-?
Cry. Looks like MoD will do its best to ensure the India loses the next war.
Could just be a tactic to keep the Frenchies in line. The French are know to be hardnosed negotiaters.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5721
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Kartik »

Will wrote:
Cry. Looks like MoD will do its best to ensure the India loses the next war.
Could just be a tactic to keep the Frenchies in line. The French are know to be hardnosed negotiaters.[/quote]

what tactic could it be? EADS already knows the IAF wanted the A-330MRTT and they're now L1. By splitting a potential larger order into 2 small batches, we're not doing ourselves any favour.

The longer they wait to place the order for the next 6, the costlier those 6 will get! The price will not stay constant and if the order size is large enough, its even more incentive for the manufacturer to give a good price and try to seal the deal. Next we'll see that the next batch of 6 refuellers (and I pray to God that the MoD is not staffed by such blithering idiots who'd want another tender for the next 6) will cost more than the first 6. Whereas, if they'd gone for the 6 and placed 6 as options, the price is frozen till a specific time during which the order has to be confirmed. Then you get the next batch of 6 for the same price as the first batch.

I'm amazed that having had the experience of price escalations on the A-50EI Phalcons, the MoD has seemed to learn very little. The prudent deals were the P-8I where the second batch of 4 will have similar unit costs as the first 8 because they were on options and C-130J where the second batch of 6 cost the same as the first batch..

The logic seems to be 'pehle istemaal kare phir vishwaas kare' but this is hardly logical in this case. There are no real options apart from the A-330MRTT and the Il-78MKI for the IAF. the KC-46 for the USAF is still in development phase and introducing a new type into service in such small numbers is foolhardy when one already has both the A-330MRTT and Il-78MKI. so why waste time and money on a new tender instead of adding the other 6 as options? It doesn't cost us anything to add options!
According to Air Chief Marshal Browne, as the second batch of the aircraft is being purchased under the options clause in the 2008, the basic price should be the same. There could some equipment variations or additional requirements though.

Offset details could also vary.
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Post by Cybaru »

Kartik wrote:
Why upgrade them at all? They were Mirage-2000-5s in the first place. And if some system commonality is a factor, then those changes can be done at HAL which will have the facilities for upgrading the Mirages.

Besides, the operating cost of a Mirage-2000 vs the much larger twin engined MKI over 15-20 years would make this a much cheaper option.
Sure, that seems like a reasonable argument. But unless these platforms are at the same level as other IAF assets, there will be enough differences in them to require special training for pilots, ground staff, procedures and inter-operability will be a pain. You won’t be able to take pilots from one squad and deploy them to another one without conversion training as their training will require tweaking for sure. Connecting with AWACS and other assets will also be a problem.

We have made it so far with this fleet. I think it is time to dump the old 3/3.5 gen stuff and replace with new builds/platforms only. If the new french deal gets signed, we will be adding in about 2 new squadrons ( 1 MKI + 1 Rafale) a year. That is close to 60/80 pilots getting moved to new platforms a year. That is a lot of change already. The darin3 jaguar upgrade, the mig-29 upgrade, mirage2000 upgrade will already cause a lot of flux in IAF. If LCA gets through IOC/FOC that will be another 2 squadrons in the next 3-4 time frame. This will also prevent issues of spares another 10-15 years down the road when we will be as always the only operator for this type(mig-29) of aircraft in the world. The new stuff maybe expensive for sure, but it is far more capable than anything we ever operated. It can run SEAD/A2G/AA/surveillance/buddy-refueler tasking with one type of craft ( Both MKI/Rafale)

No matter how you dice it, adding these airframes will mean deep upgrades to a common IAF level whatever that maybe IMO. So unless we are ready to commit to that level of spending on a 3rd gen platform, it doesn't make sense.
Post Reply