Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

[Viv S]

To those talking about 'need' for IJT when other air forces don't use intermediate trainers - do you understand the implication of this statement? It means there is no requirement for IJT and all the money spent on the project is down the drain. As is the order for 83 aircraft by IAF. And per chance, if IJT stands cancelled - who benefits from it all? The Pilatus and the Hawk manufacturers. Of course, HAL gets to rid itself of a troubling project and it gets quietly buried in the hubris. Back to assembling foreign products w/o learning anything worthwhile.

The context of my post (which I assume you're referring to) was the IAF's tender for an IJT. Not the HAL program. We stick with the latter and its worth it even with a delayed timeframe.

The IAF sees the need for IJT - and unless one can prove this requirement is redundant (apart from simply stating X, Y or Z AF don't have IJT) - and that is how it will be. One simple reason for having IJT could be that it helps to REDUCE the number of more expensive AJT required.

Its not question of X, Y or Z not fielding IJT/AJTs, its about every single air force sticking to a two tier fighter training program. All of them operate various classes of transports, helicopters and supporting aircraft. The IAF's requirements are hardly unique as far as pilot training is concerned.

'More expensive AJT' is precisely where the problem arises. Any IJT acquired from abroad will doubtless be license built by HAL. New assembly line, associated training, new support infrastructure, separate logistics, expenditure on ToT and so on. All while the existing Hawk line at HAL is mothballed (or condemned?) and the potential of the Tejas wasted in the LIFT role.

[TSJones]

On this completely idiotic and laughably brainless banter that passes for discussion on whether stall and spin recovery training is necessary or not - here is one dead man (my cousin) who is now useless to the world who wrote some stuff or the other before he decided to log out. He did more spin recoveries than combat. He saw some combat too - shot down a Sabre and was one of the Longewala pilots

If anyone gets gyan from it, fine. Or else no problem. Nothing gained. Nothing lost.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... uresh.html

MiG-21, although a high demand aircraft, is docile and has no aerodynamic vices. It has excellent handling characteristics and has served to provide very valuable flying experience to a large number of IAF pilots. Some like the previous and the present CAS swear by the aircraft. It is the docility of the aircraft that not only generates a good bit of confidence but also encourages forays into exceeding the limits of the stipulated flight envelope. In air combat maneuvers, many inexperienced pilots have got into trouble without realizing it. At high angles of attack, the induced drag increases sharply and unless the angle of attack is quickly reduced, the aircraft develops a high rate of descent, which cannot be arrested with the power available (even with reheat). Added to this, there is no protest from the aircraft like severe shudder, wing rocking. etc, prevalent in other types of aircraft. This gives a feeling of well-being and a number of pilots did not recognize the danger in time to take recovery action or eject.

The training of pilots is under constant review with procedures being updated regularly and creating the required level of awareness. IAF has very strict norms during each stage of training and only those who have the capability are posted to fly fighters. Even with the finest of filters there is always someone who would get through various stages without showing any weakness. Some of these individuals get in to trouble, fail to recover from difficult situations and sometimes they compound a simple emergency. This is a human failing and is no different in any other part of the world and Indians alone cannot be singled out for it. One particular CAS (in mid 80s) is on record to have stated that “I would rather lose a pilot in an error type of accident than in actual combat, for those who survive the rigors of peace time would be really combat ready”. While this is one way of viewing an accident, the proper way would be to consider even “One accident as One too many”. It is very difficult particularly for the families of those who lost someone close to accept error or error of judgment on the part the individual. It must be appreciated that the best of professionals make mistakes, be it Tendulkar, Tiger Woods or Pete Sampras. A fighter pilot has no chance like these top sportsman who are firmly on ground (not having challenged gravity) and are able to play the next innings or the next match.

no one is useless to the world if they have sought truth....they live on in their words and deeds.

death be not proud, where now is thy victory where now is thy sting?

[Pratyush]

Regarding the IJT issue, I have a different question.

Is there a sufficient difference, in terms of performance, between the PC 7 and the IJT to require a dedicated IJT for stage 2. I mean other then the fact that one is jet and the other is turboprop.

[shiv]

Regarding the IJT issue, I have a different question.

Is there a sufficient difference, in terms of performance, between the PC 7 and the IJT to require a dedicated IJT for stage 2. I mean other then the fact that one is jet and the other is turboprop.

Jet engine management

[deejay]

Pratyush Ji, Shiv sir has broadly answered your query. To answer your query and others who have suggested that all major Air Forces including USAF have only two staged flight training, I have attempted below to get together my views along with pieces of articles or links to explain the training.

I am no expert here but my two bits on IAF training requiring an IJT:

To train as a pilot if a pilot needs X hrs of flying:
> The more the value of X (or the closer X is to infinity) the greater the chance a person will qualify to be a pilot.
> The lesser the value of X (or the closer X is to zero) the lesser the chance a person will qualify to be a pilot.
> For military pilots, value of X is small for the roles and complexities they need to show adequate progress during flying training.

To address this in IAF, a committee was formed to develop an Optimized Training Model. The report was submitted in 1983. This is where a three stage training model was accepted. The committees report should be available in open source, but I was unable to find it. AFAIK this has not been superseded yet. If it has changed, I apologies in advance and please do let me know the current status. The basic structure of the training remains same though, changes and tweaks are often carried out.

A reference to this may be found on this link (It is dated and the reference to the Optimized Training Model is on pg 293 in the context of AJT). http://books.google.co.in/books?id=8Pip ... g=wfaXIDno

I am unable to source any direct viewpoint from the IAF on the question you have asked but a vague idea of the IAF can be picked up from this (reference link:https://www.facebook.com/airforceassoci ... 1075158119)

Training
Air warriors today operate complex technological systems with near zero levels of error tolerance. Hence, there is a need to raise the training standards to the level mandated by modern inductions. IAF procured the Pilatus PC-7 Mk II recently for basic stage training. Stage II fighter training remains on the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL)-built Kiran aircraft while the IAF awaits indigenous intermediate jet trainer (IJT) under development with HAL. The BAE Hawk advanced jet trainer (AJT) is used for advanced jet training. Helicopter and transport pilots train at Hakimpet and Yelahanka respectively.

Another source is an interview of a former AOP: http://www.sps-aviation.com/interviews/?id=1&h=
The first paragraph is the most relevant to our present discussion though even this talks of the AJT

The advanced stage of fighter training (Stage–III) was earlier conducted entirely on the Kiran Mk-II ac followed by training on to the Mig-21 aircraft (Stage-IV) before the trainee was posted to the operational squadrons. Hawk Mk-132 advanced jet trainer) induction into the IAF was commenced in 2008 as a lead in fighter trainer with an aim to completely replace the Kiran Mk-II/ Mig-21 route of training. Training on a modern Hawk AJT is aimed at bridging the gap between a slow speed subsonic Kiran aircraft and the high speed fighter jet and enable the trainee to graduate smoothly on to a more complex frontline fighter aircraft in lesser time than the Kiran–Mig-21 route.

Since its inception in July 2008, a number of fighter trainees have successfully completed training on Hawks and have been posted to frontline fighter squadrons of IAF. Training of more fighter trainees is under way at Air Force Station, Bidar.

Here, the Hawk AJT is called as a Lead IN Fighter Trainer. He also talks of doing away with MOFT syllabus and hence my understanding of the 04th stage may need to change.

My view on the issue is as under

> IAF's training programme for aircrew is very evolved. However, the Simulator hours are low.
> It is possible to transition from Basic to flight line jets or AJTs as wished but a greater number of flight hours for each stage and each role training will be required.
> The roles or exercises being trained in Basic and Advanced stages are Taxiing, Take Off, Circuits, Landing, Sector Flying, Aerobatics (Basic and Advanced), Stall, Spin, Night Flying, Close Formation, Navigation, Instrument Flying, Tail Chase, Instrument and Let Down approaches, Airman-ship, SA, RT, etc. Armament was practiced but later removed from training profile of Basic and Advanced Stages. (my info may be a bit dated so any corrections here are welcome)
> Towards this training the hours allotted as per syllabus is ~ 120- 140 Hrs (has varied often).
> The Pilatus on paper looks capable of undertaking all roles in the syllabus. The HPT 32 also appeared capable but were not used in night flying mostly.
> The transition to only Pilatus prior to Hawk AJTs may be done as a stop gap if the IJT is delayed. This will also require a significant jump in actual flight hours and simulator training and adequate simulators for the AJTs will be needed.
> The IJT is a domestic programme, a requirement of the IAF derived out of a considered approach to training. The HAL has invested many years and a lot of money here. The idea to completely drop the IJT therefore is as stupid as the RFI of the IAF in buying an IJT from a foreign manufacturer.

Those, arguing that USAF uses two stage training, what I found out was that the US Air Force treats flight training in two parts consisting of at least 03 stages in total. The USAF has seen major training programme changes and often the hardware was a critical factor. Part 1 is where all pilots undergo the same training and then Part 2 where training after splitting in to Fighters, Transports and Helicopters is done. Part 1 is in two stages (If some one knows of any changes please correct me): Stage 1 is for those who do not already have a civilian private pilots license or higher. Here all such USAF trainees go to authorised Civilian flight schools and get their certification done by Civilian qualified instructors on a basic single engine piston aircraft. They need to go solo in 25 hrs and must fly for 50 hrs. The flight syllabus is same as for civilian pilots license. I found this article on USAF training, dated but relevant, so you may check: http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA420558

The course originally required SUPT candidates (who did not already hold a private pilot license) to log 40 light plane flying hours and solo at least once in those 40 hours before entering SUPT. In January 2000, however, IFT expanded to a 50-hour program, with a requirement that candidates solo within 25 hours and earn their private pilot license within the allotted 50 hours.96 This construct remains in effect to date.

P.S. I am guessing that most of the links provided by me would already be on BR but since I was reading the topic separately, I used my links instead of fishing from BR.

[rohitvats]

Its not question of X, Y or Z not fielding IJT/AJTs, its about every single air force sticking to a two tier fighter training program. All of them operate various classes of transports, helicopters and supporting aircraft. The IAF's requirements are hardly unique as far as pilot training is concerned

The above is not a sufficient argument for me to question the training pedagogy of IAF. It's taking an easy way out w/o bothering to even check why IAF has three different stages and similar number of types of a/c.

Someone mentioned (I think you) that IAF went for Stage II on Kiran because we did not have AJT and rookie pilots would've graduated from HPT-32 to Mig-21 trainers.While that looks plausible, it does not fly in face of facts. Simple point - at no point in time has IAF asked for 'X' number of AJT which would meet the training requirement of Stage II and Stage III combined. And do away with Kiran in Stage II. Had that been the case, HAL would not have had IJT project to begin with - the imported and locally manufactured Hawk would have replaced them in IAF service.

But that is not the case - So, the requirement is MORE than IJT being simply a filler between HPT-32 and Mig-21. So, there is clear and present requirement for IJT irrespective of what other air-force around the world do.

IAF has stuck its neck out with HAL which has not delivered the a/c so far. And does not look like delivering it anytime soon. And IAF has clear and present requirement for an IJT. Indigenous or otherwise.

'More expensive AJT' is precisely where the problem arises. Any IJT acquired from abroad will doubtless be license built by HAL. New assembly line, associated training, new support infrastructure, separate logistics, expenditure on ToT and so on. All while the existing Hawk line at HAL is mothballed (or condemned?) and the potential of the Tejas wasted in the LIFT role.

Now, unless the Hawk manufactured at HAL comes at a price cheaper or even similar to imported IJT (if there is one!), I don't think IAF will mind buying additional HAWK for Stage II training. But I don't think that is the case.

IMO, per unit cost of HAWK is in INR 135-150 Crore range for an order of 106+17 jets. Now, what is going to be per unit cost of IJT manufactured by HAL? I don't have any numbers for this but would not be surprised if it cost less than 50% of HAWK...even an imported+locally assembled ones would cost 50%-60% of what HAWK does. Why would you want to buy another 80-90 more HAWK and burn a huge hole in your pocket? That HAWK line was at it is supposed to cater to preexisting order for HAWK, so where does this talk of 'wasting' it comes from?

As for Tejas and LIFT - let is first enter proper squadron service before we start taking about LIFT or any other derivatives.

[Indranil]

On this completely idiotic and laughably brainless banter that passes for discussion on whether stall and spin recovery training is necessary or not - here is one dead man (my cousin) who is now useless to the world who wrote some stuff or the other before he decided to log out. He did more spin recoveries than combat. He saw some combat too - shot down a Sabre and was one of the Longewala pilots

If anyone gets gyan from it, fine. Or else no problem. Nothing gained. Nothing lost.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... uresh.html

MiG-21, although a high demand aircraft, is docile and has no aerodynamic vices. It has excellent handling characteristics and has served to provide very valuable flying experience to a large number of IAF pilots. Some like the previous and the present CAS swear by the aircraft. It is the docility of the aircraft that not only generates a good bit of confidence but also encourages forays into exceeding the limits of the stipulated flight envelope. In air combat maneuvers, many inexperienced pilots have got into trouble without realizing it. At high angles of attack, the induced drag increases sharply and unless the angle of attack is quickly reduced, the aircraft develops a high rate of descent, which cannot be arrested with the power available (even with reheat). Added to this, there is no protest from the aircraft like severe shudder, wing rocking. etc, prevalent in other types of aircraft. This gives a feeling of well-being and a number of pilots did not recognize the danger in time to take recovery action or eject.

The training of pilots is under constant review with procedures being updated regularly and creating the required level of awareness. IAF has very strict norms during each stage of training and only those who have the capability are posted to fly fighters. Even with the finest of filters there is always someone who would get through various stages without showing any weakness. Some of these individuals get in to trouble, fail to recover from difficult situations and sometimes they compound a simple emergency. This is a human failing and is no different in any other part of the world and Indians alone cannot be singled out for it. One particular CAS (in mid 80s) is on record to have stated that “I would rather lose a pilot in an error type of accident than in actual combat, for those who survive the rigors of peace time would be really combat ready”. While this is one way of viewing an accident, the proper way would be to consider even “One accident as One too many”. It is very difficult particularly for the families of those who lost someone close to accept error or error of judgment on the part the individual. It must be appreciated that the best of professionals make mistakes, be it Tendulkar, Tiger Woods or Pete Sampras. A fighter pilot has no chance like these top sportsman who are firmly on ground (not having challenged gravity) and are able to play the next innings or the next match.

Hakim,

I have a humble request. Please don't add those disclaimers. We would berate his service and sacrifice by not heeding his thoughts and views.

But I understand your remark on internet banter. I had not read this article before and I find it remarkable how similar the points are to the scenario that I was trying to pull up with my last post. I got them from the people in the field too. But then internet warriors will believe what they want to believe. And, I am not absolving myself of that guilt either.

[NRao]

Is there any authority, above *both* the IAF and HAL, that should fall on the sword? Someone who is expected to direct traffic in such matters?

[nachiket]

shiv,

What you say is right - but lets not overestimate the importance of spin recovery. As you note aircraft are made to fly not stall. In a two seater, with an experienced pilot in one seàt, a spin is not somethng that just happens. Flying is not something this erratic that for this trainer, a spin would just happen everyday. Hgh T/W aircraft dont just stall for lack of lift and you dont go distracted watching VFR wonders.

Having good spin characteristics is one of the most important things for a jet trainer. Please read Air Marshal Rajkumar's article about his evaluation the Alpha Jet and Hawk back in the 80's. They evaluated the spin characteristics very carefully as it was considered essential that the aircraft on which all of the IAF's pilots would be training should not only be easily recoverable from a spin, but also enter a spin predictably with the right inputs.

A fighter jet needs to be recoverable from a spin because a pilot might mistakenly put it in one during combat maneuvering. A trainer needs to be recoverable from a spin because trainees and trainers will deliberately put it into a spin to teach the trainee how to recover from it. Whether or not newer fighter jets are harder to stall and put into a spin is beside the point. The IAF isn't going to let any rookie pilot fly them unless they are sure he has been given enough training in spin recovery.

Your statement about "overestimating" the importance of spin recovery is frankly laughable.

[Victor]

Is there a sufficient difference, in terms of performance, between the PC 7 and the IJT to require a dedicated IJT for stage 2. I mean other then the fact that one is jet and the other is turboprop.

In the current situation, there is not enough difference to require a dedicated IJT. Of course, the situation was totally different before the PC-7/Hawk combo arrived.

Modern trainers like the PC-7 have means of mimicking jets thru FBW when required so transitioning to the Hawk is not a problem. Even the cockpits are similar. The HPT-32 Deepak didn't have this capability so the Kiran IJT was a necessity to transition to the MiGs.

Props have near-instant acceleration and deceleration unlike jets which take a little longer to speed up or slow down. This makes it trickier to control speed, attitude and altitude, specially during landing which is where most jet accidents happen.

[Shreeman]

Your statement about "overestimating" the importance of spin recovery is frankly laughable.

This pretty much summarizes why serious dicussion is outt of bounds for me. This is what I was disputing.

A flight training program consists of:
1. Spinning,
2. Passing out.

passing out here could be graduation or the literal meaning. During a war, pilots will go up in their fancy planes and spin!

No? Then the IJT is fine for many uses why some characteristics are not known. Spin in your fancy pilatus or hawk.

In case of Arjun, we need to fire missiles. Cost of import, usage scenario, need, all irrelevant. We need it to fire 100km range missiles or its a total failure.

IJT doesnt spin the first time it goes up,, scrap the project!

And now, I apologize and take my leave. thank you knidlee.

[chackojoseph]

Not directly Military aviation,

RTA is hotting up.

India to float request proposal for Regional Transport Aircraft, UK shows interest

Some of the key representatives from UK industries such as ADS Group, Aircraft Research Association, Cobham, Cranfield University, Meggitt, Rolls Royce, Stirling Dynamics, Ultra Controls, UTAS, UKIBC were present in the meeting.

[shiv]

A fighter jet needs to be recoverable from a spin because a pilot might mistakenly put it in one during combat maneuvering.

Nachiket a small quibble. Not all fighters can recover from spin. Some were known to be unrecoverable. But the reason why spin training is important is that it is frightening and disorientating and the pilot needs to keep a cool head when it happens and eject if need be at the appropriate time if recovery is not an option. A panicked and disoriented pilot may not even be able to do that. Obviously the only way to do that is in a trainer aircraft that can be made to spin on demand - and for the pilot and aircraft to survive the training course, the trainer must also be able to recover from that deliberate spin.

I think Shreeman has been in a spin himself - so he should know.

[wig]

Full-fledged airbase along China border in Ladakh to come up at Nyoma-Land acquisition process going on at fast pace

The first full-fledged Indian airbase along the Line of Actual Control with China in the strategically important Ladakh region will come up at Nyoma and presently land acquisition process is going on at fast pace. The airbase would go long way in building up and strengthening existing military infrastructure along the border with the hostile neighbour.
Sources told EXCELSIOR that Indian Air Force has chosen Mudh area of Nyoma for construction of full-fledged fighter aircraft base, which would be the first ever along the Line of Actual Control with China. At present, the concerned authorities of the Army and Indian Air Force are engaged in land acquisition process.
“Soon after acquiring the required land, which is going on at fast pace, the Indian Air Force would start the construction work”, they said, adding “the construction of fighter aircraft base in Eastern Ladakh is part of Indian Air Force’s efforts to build up military infrastructure along the border with China”.
Stating that Nyoma is an important location for Army as well as Indian Air Force in the Eastern Ladakh, sources said, “though an air strip exists in Nyoma but the same cannot be used for the landing of fighter planes and heavy transport aircrafts”. “This airstrip, which overlooks a highway being used by the Chinese Army, was last used in 1960s and thereafter India stopped using it. Now, IAF wants to construct full-fledged airbase at this location by acquiring additional land”, they added.
Nyoma, which is located at a height of 13,000 feet, would be used to station fighter jets and provide logistical help to the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) and Army, which patrol the Line of Actual Control, sources said, adding “all types of aircrafts including fighters, helicopters and transport aircraft would be capable of being deployed and operated from Nyoma”. Moreover, an officer of the rank of Air Commodore would be commanding this full-fledged airbase.
It is pertinent to mention here that Nyoma airbase would be lower in height than the Advanced Landing Ground at Daulat Beg Oldie, which is considered as one of the highest landing strips in the world.
Stating that Nyoma airbase would strategically boost defense along the Line of Actual Control with China, sources said, “this station would help in maintaining supplies and other logistics to the forces deployed to check nefarious designs of dragon”.
This would be the fourth air force station in Ladakh region. At present, there are three stations-one each at Kargil, Leh and Thoise. The airbases at Kargil and Thoise are catering to the requirement of the forces deployed along the border with Pakistan. The Thoise airbase in Shyok valley is situated at an altitude of 10059 feet.
“The building of new infrastructure and strengthening of existing along the Line of Actual Control with China is of paramount importance keeping in view the aggressive attitude of neighboring country towards India”, sources said, adding “the frequent incursions by the Chinese
Army into Indian side in Ladakh region particularly in Chumur and Demchok clearly indicates the dragon has not mended its ways”.
“On one side the Chinese Army is indulging in frequent incursions into Indian territory and on the other side it has objection to the inadvertent crossing of LAC by the cattle-heads of Ladakh people”, sources said while disclosing that recently Chinese Army sent a threatening letter this side after some cattle heads went to their side.
The threatening letter was sent to Indian side by fixing the same on the horn of an animal.

http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/full-fled ... ome-nyoma/

[nachiket]

A fighter jet needs to be recoverable from a spin because a pilot might mistakenly put it in one during combat maneuvering.

Nachiket a small quibble. Not all fighters can recover from spin. Some were known to be unrecoverable. But the reason why spin training is important is that it is frightening and disorientating and the pilot needs to keep a cool head when it happens and eject if need be at the appropriate time if recovery is not an option. A panicked and disoriented pilot may not even be able to do that. Obviously the only way to do that is in a trainer aircraft that can be made to spin on demand - and for the pilot and aircraft to survive the training course, the trainer must also be able to recover from that deliberate spin.

You are right shiv saar. Inducting a fighter incapable of recovery from some type of spin might be alright, but inducting a trainer with the same flaw would be stupid. Whatever problems the IJT might have with this will need to be solved prior to induction.

We can't be too harsh on HAL about this though. Spin characteristics are hard to tell at the design stage. I remember the interview with Mikhail Simonov posted here a long time ago in which he says this:

They say that originally it was believed that the Su-27 cannot exit from a stupor.

Yes, such was the conclusion of TsAGI after wind tunnel testing of the model: the aircraft cannot exit from a stupor. Something had to be done about this. A system was developed that would not allow the plane to exceed the AOA of 24 degrees.

Not a single Su-27 model in TsAGI's wind tunnel was able to exit from the stupor. ....

....About 20 seconds. In the air it seems like much longer. Once the aircraft has reached the 60-deg. AOA (and we only had the permission for 24 degrees) the aircraft fell into a spin and started spinning with its nose pointed toward the ground. The pilot then realized what has happened and reported to the ground controller: "Stupor!" Since it was believed that an Su-27 cannot exit from a stupor, the ground controller's only order for the pilot was as if struck in stone: "Eject at an altitude of no lower than 4,000 meters."

Ejecting is hardly a pilot's favorite thing to do, thus to avoid serious injuries the pilots has released the controls and started preparing for the ejection. However, at the last moment he noticed that the aircraft had exited from the spin and now beginning to exit from the dive as well. The Su-27, when left on its own, was able to return to the normal flight. After verifying that the aircraft was still controllable, Kotlov made a safe landing.

Perhaps this was just a coincidence?

This was our conclusion at first as well: for the 1000 flights this was the only such situation. On the big count this did not matter. However, a shirt time later an even more incredible situation occurred in the Far East. An Su-27 pilot was performing an automatic intercept exercise. The plane exceeded the critical angle of attack and entered a stupor. Following the order from the ground controller the pilot ejected, after which the Su-27 exited from the spin and the autopilot resumed its course until the plane ran out of fuel. Soon after a third such incident occurred in Lipetsk8. This forced us to establish a special research plan to investigate this phenomenon. As it turned out during the course of the investigation, the Su-27 exhibited certain instability when entering the spin and exiting from it. It was established that even the most effective aerodynamic methods for exiting from a spin did not always result in the desired outcome. At the same time in a number of situations the plane would exit from a spin on its own when the position of its control surfaces was neutral. This was later explained by the peculiarities of the Su-27's air vortex aerodynamics at various angles of glide and attack.

A considerable role in our "victory" over the spin was played by the accomplished test-pilot, cosmonaut Igor Volk. He conducted a series of test flights and determined that the Su-27 can exit from all variations of a stupor.

The Su-27 wind-tunnel model behaved differently from the real thing. The engineers were sure the aircraft would be unrecoverable from a spin. They were pleasantly surprised to see that wasn't the case. It could easily have been the other way around.

[Singha]

the chinese have also made some contrarian and pleasant discovery during testing with the J20 flight model which was not predicted by their math simulations. apparently their canard-wing-tailplane tri design is ok for supercruise/drag etc in a way better than they expected. a long post was seen in br a while ago copied from somewhere else.

[Shreeman]

A fighter jet needs to be recoverable from a spin because a pilot might mistakenly put it in one during combat maneuvering.

Nachiket a small quibble. Not all fighters can recover from spin. Some were known to be unrecoverable. But the reason why spin training is important is that it is frightening and disorientating and the pilot needs to keep a cool head when it happens and eject if need be at the appropriate time if recovery is not an option. A panicked and disoriented pilot may not even be able to do that. Obviously the only way to do that is in a trainer aircraft that can be made to spin on demand - and for the pilot and aircraft to survive the training course, the trainer must also be able to recover from that deliberate spin.

I think Shreeman has been in a spin himself - so he should know.

thanks shiv. Just FYI, the non-clean stall speed of the hawk is around 1xx KIAS, the pilatus probably 20-30 kias lower. your cessna types are in 50-70. thge IJT will fall in this range. it makes no huge difference whether you also stall ijt as well as these others.

Being a single engine entity, the cost of operation is likely to be lower than hawk and you can build and flog thgrm as you like. without stalling for a while if need be.

this calculus shows someone somewhere stands to make money on a delayed ijt. thats why blk-1 reduced functionality is not in service. no such obligations on t90 minus armor or su-30k instead of mki or hawk with itsparts problems initially, or seakings being hangar queens during sanctions or aw101s being now grounded or the original westlands, or the mig21 arriving just as a canon fighter and contributing zilch at first. need we go on.

the thought process is -- there will never be a war. small scale hostilities endanger no elite. make hay (or money) while you can. there is a large treasury. domestic production can stay at the quality of the hindustan motors or even the lambretta. i saw this in telecommunications thirty years ago when it was the norm across the government. at least there are fewer sectors (defense primarily now) afflicted.

[Sid]

There are two different points being discussed in this thread right now -

1. Should we induct IJT without spin/stall recovery tests, as Mark 1 fighters.. this is what Shreeman has been emphasizing till now.
2. Should spin/stall recovery be part of training (Shiv's point). Of course it should be, there should be no doubt about it.

IMHO IJTs should be inducted in phased manner with gradual up-gradation of its capabilities. We did the same with Druav ALH.

IAF has two other trainers which has this feature and trainees can exploit them to hon their spin/stall recovery skills. No need to stall induction of aircraft until it meets the IAF's "gold" standard.

What if Pilatus didn't had spin/stall recovery feature? Do we think IAF wouldn't have bought this plan?

[shiv]

thanks shiv. Just FYI, the non-clean stall speed of the hawk is around 1xx KIAS, the pilatus probably 20-30 kias lower. your cessna types are in 50-70. thge IJT will fall in this range. it makes no huge difference whether you also stall ijt as well as these others.

Valid observation, but I wonder if jet engine management after a stall is an additional responsibility a pilot has to become familiar with. But then there is the Hawk for that isn't there? It the issue really about how the IJT would behave if it were to stall - and that seems to be a mystery now.

[Picklu]

Jet Li donning both fin min and def min is no co-incidence. Neither it will be when VKS or some such from services background is slowly glided into def min role. Have faith in NaMoji.

The first was to reduce import of anything other than TINA. The second is necessary to ensure TINA percentage gets reduced every year with creative problem solving as Sreeman Sir (and many others) are advocating. It is nothing creative, marely common sense; but no bloody civilian in MoD will be able to tell that to services face hence someone from services background is necessary.

Before anyone comes after me with pitchfork for this grave slight of the services, please read Hari Nair Sir's post in Heli dhaga about the necessity to curb the power of individual services in formulating GSQR. The malady is not restricted there only.

The cleaning up needed in OFB and def PSU is a different matter altogether and must be fixed simultaneously (or slightly latter); but the current situation should not be allowed to persist for the fear of chicken and egg situation.

As the bloomberg article mentioned, no TOT will be incoming with Indians in control. Either we continue paying hafta to the US-OIRO MIC cabal for our security or bite the bullet for once and for all.

[John]

1. Should we induct IJT without spin/stall recovery tests, as Mark 1 fighters.. this is what Shreeman has been emphasizing till now.
2. Should spin/stall recovery be part of training (Shiv's point). Of course it should be, there should be no doubt about it.

Spin/stall is not the only thing holding it up there is also weight issues.

[Indranil]

1. Should we induct IJT without spin/stall recovery tests, as Mark 1 fighters.. this is what Shreeman has been emphasizing till now.
2. Should spin/stall recovery be part of training (Shiv's point). Of course it should be, there should be no doubt about it.

No, that is not the point. IJT can enter a spin during various training lessons other than the one where they are being taught to recover from spin! For example, it can stall during recovery from a dive, or an Immelmann, or a spilt S, or a cuban 8, or a loop. What do you do then? Eject? Why do you think that the F-100s, F-104s crashing so much? Were they practicing spin lessons?

You guys seem to be fixated on just spin lessons. Of course it can be done on other aircrafts. The goal of those lessons is not on how to recover from a spin. The mechanism is different for different aircraft. Pilots learn them for each aircraft they fly. The goal of the lesson is to understand the onset of stall, familiarize with the feeling of when in a spin, and to get a sense of how to keep your head cool in those conditions and follow procedures (some of which are counter intuitive). For example hear the AI-11 talk on the testing of F-18. Test pilots could not follow procedure, because they were counter intuitive.

Spin/stall is not the only thing holding it up there is also weight issues.

I don't think that will hold up the production. They will bring them online as and when they become available. JMT.

[ramana]

Some guru says the IJT has assymetry in its design. This leads to the problems in case of trouble.

[rohitvats]

Frankly, the arguments about IJT and Spin issue have started to border on ridiculous.

When you cannot explain the delay in induction of an aircraft by a decade to bad project management by OEM, it's time trot out the favorite conspiracy theories - (a) Everything is hunky-dory with the equipment but for GOLD standard requirement of IAF (b) Conspiracy by foreign product loving Services to scuttle a domestic product.

One simply needs to read that report about crash of IJT - the a/c could not recover from an 'unintended' maneuver. We've heard about the symmetry issue and IJT wings dropping at certain AoA. But it seems that a/c also has issue(s) with recovering from spin. And which AF in the world will allow a TRAINER aircraft which has issue(s) with recovering from spin into service to train rookie pilots?

It would be interesting to see which agency certifies this as air-worthy for training purpose.

And while we're at it, here are some extracts from a cached copy of Vayu Aerospace article by AM Rajkumar on his test evaluation of Alpha Jet and HAWK in 1986:
(http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/ ... d_Jet.pdf)

By the end of 1985 the Plans branch at Air Headquarters had issued an Air Staff Requirement (ASR) and short listed two AJTs for evaluation. These were the Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet from France/Germany and the Hawk from British Aerospace, UK. One of the requirements in the ASR was that the aircraft should have “good spinning and recovery characteristics”.

The team was asked to assemble at Air Headquarters in the last week of April 1986 for briefing prior to departure.
Before going to Delhi, PR Sharma and I flew a sortie in a Kiran Mk.1 and carried out a number of spins to feel comfortable in a spinning aircraft. Spinning practice is invaluable before embarking on spin evaluation in a new aircraft because one’s ability to observe spin characteristics with a critical eye is dependent on current spinning practice. When one is current in spinning it is as if many more channels of observation have opened up and situational awareness (while in the spin) is vastly improved.

We were told that two versions of the aircraft would be offered for evaluation, the Alpha Jet NG (Nouvelle Generation) which was
an attack version with a laser range finder, an Inertial Nav Attack System (INAS) and a Head Up Display (HUD). This aircraft had a slim pointed nose and was not cleared for spinning. The second aircraft was a standard trainer with a blunt nose which was cleared for spinning. I never knew that a small change in the shape of the nose would have such a marked effect on spinning characteristics of an aircraft. On inquiring about this characteristic a Dassault aerodynamicist explained to me with the help of diagrams how the wake generated by the slim pointed nose of the spinning aircraft impinged on the fin and rudder and reduced its effectiveness for recovery. A blunt nose, on the other hand, generated a wake which did not hit the fin at all

I guess, the above aspect explains this on HAWK AJT:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mXoOJjOCPnA/T ... _008-1.jpg

We did spinning, all aerobatics, a practice flame out pattern over the airfield and some circuits and overshoots. The aircraft was a sheer delight to fly but what impressed me most was that four different types of spins could be demonstrated to pupils in perfect safety. The aircraft could be put into a normal spin, an oscillatory spin, a flat spin and an inverted spin depending upon the control inputs at entry. I was quite familiar with normal and oscillatory spins as I had experienced them in a number of aircraft. The flat and inverted spins were new to me and I was fascinated by the experience. In a flat spin the predominant motion was very fast yaw in the direction of the applied rudder with the nose of the aircraft on the horizon. The spin axis passed behind the cockpit and one had the feeling of being chucked forward against the straps making the eyeballs bulge out! In the inverted spin the field of view during the spin was restricted and one was hanging against the straps. The recovery action was simple and elegant for all types of spins − hands and feet off the controls and the aircraft recovered in a steep nose down attitude! Two handles provided on the cockpit frame to close and raise the canopy were called ‘spin recovery handles’ as all that one had to do to recover from a spin was to take the feet off the rudder pedals and grab the two handles with one’s two hands. I decided to ask for another sortie devoted exclusively to spinning

On 8 May 1986 I flew a 85 minute sortie on Hawk X-345 with Jim. We climbed to 40,000 feet and arrived over Cardiff and started doing spins over the Bristol Channel. The Hawk did not want to spin and one had to sit with pro spin controls applied for several seconds before she dipped the nose and settled into what appeared to be a steep nose down corkscrew motion. Standard application of anti spin controls ensured quick recovery. After the Alpha Jet experience this was an unimpressive spin. We then descended to about 15,000 feet and did all aerobatics and the handling qualities were good. On circuit the aircraft handled crisply with quick response to power changes. After a couple of overshoots I did a smooth touch down and the toe brakes slowed the aircraft down comfortably

During the last sortie we did two spins with in spin and out spin aileron applied. The aircraft exhibited classical behavior in that in spin aileron application made the spin oscillatory while out spin aileron smoothened it

One wonders which aircraft would've entered in IAF service if the deal would have been done on time!

BTW - here is a relevant extract from IAF RFP:

“Stalling. An unmistakable natural stall warning should be available, irrespective of the configuration. (b) Spinning. The aircraft must be resistant to spin but it should be possible to perform intentional spin up to six turns to either side and recover safely thereafter. The aircraft behavior in the spin should be predictable and consistent

.

[rohitvats]

To more technically minded - and qualified - posters/participants/lurker/martians on BRF, a detailed technical article on how PC-21 was designed from word go 'FOR SPIN':

http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS20 ... RS/485.PDF

The Pilatus PC-21 advanced turboprop trainer was designed from the start to obtain desirable spin characteristics. This was achieved by conducting rotary and oscillatory balance wind tunnel tests very early in the program, by utilizing the wind tunnel data for real time flight simulation, and by comparing simulation results of a "proof-of-concept" configuration with flight tests of a prototype based on an existing design. A safe, efficient and highly successful flight test program dedicated to spin characteristics investigation confirmed the predictions based on wind tunnel testing and proved the validity of this “design for spin” approach.

[Shreeman]

my 2c or 2 naye paise were, given that

You Go To War With The Army You Have---not The Army You Might Want Or Wish To Have At A Later Time.

or similar. Not that I like Rumsfeld, but this is a valid statement.

Without transparency, we only know a) spin entry/recovery characteristics ,b) weight by a few hundred kg.

Build a curriculum around what you have like you did with HTT32, and kiran. Dont hold up matters.

Everyone above is right, but none addresses the fact that a million lessons can be taught with the IJT as is.

And those that claim it might enter unintended spin -- a) wrong profession if built in safety mechanisms (second seat, ejection seat,stall warning, limiters) arent sufficient, b)bird strikes are just as likely as the convoluted scenarios being presented.

No one instrument of training will ever do everything. why delay?

[Vipul]

Knights in flying armour.

Whenever India needed a guardian, the air warrior has always stood tall. How can a man die better than facing fearful odds, for the ashes of his father, for the temple of his gods"

These are more than just mere words. They appear in a montage at the beginning of Guardians of the Skies. They might spur you to play the Indian Air Force (IAF)'s official air combat game and for many others might provide an added impetus to pursue a career as an air warrior.

Launched in the first week of July, Guardians is a 3D flight simulator that puts users in the cockpit of some of IAF's finest aircraft as they go through training and combat missions. Developed by Indian developer Threye, Guardians features a fictitious storyline where our nation is at war with the country of Zaruzia. The game has one training and 10 combat missions. The first version of the game currently lets users play just the training mission and two operational combat missions.

'Training Day' allows users to get accustomed to flying in their first aircraft - the Sukhoi 30. You get to work on your take-off and navigation. Subsequently, you begin your armament training where you get to use weapons to neutralise air and land targets. In the final phase of the training programme, you work on mastering your landing. The landing part was a bit tricky - when you crash repeatedly, you thank your stars that it is all virtual!

Guardians currently lets users play just two combat missions - "I Smell A Rat" and "S.O.S". In the first mission, the user flies a SU 30MKI to provide cover to Indian shipping assets in an extended economic zone from pirate activity. The second one is a "search and rescue" mission, where the user flies a Mi 17V5 helicopter. Some other missions that are currently not available for playing include: Uninvited Guest, The Day of the Defender, The Thirst Quencher, The Tank Buster, Last Man Standing and so on.

The graphics and design in Guardians are commendable. The developers at Threye have done a great job in making the game virtually realistic and thrilling. Aircraft designs make sure the gameplay looks even better. The IAF logo can be seen clearly on the aircraft. Guns and rockets leave proper trails when fired at enemies or targets. The user is often addressed as "Razor One", while receiving mission orders. Meanwhile, the soundtrack and effects make the game more exciting - loud riffs form a core part of the music used in Guardians, giving it an adventurous feel.

The game interface has been kept nice and easy. The throttle, brake and landing gear buttons appear on the left of the screen. A radar shows enemy positions. There are two digital metres that appear right above the aircraft. They display the speed and height in knots and feet respectively. You can also toggle your view with a "look" button that allows you to see in every direction. Once the aircraft weapons are activated, a red trigger button appears on the bottom left. You control the speed of the aircraft with the keys, while motion sensors determine the direction. Users get warnings about stalling speed and using the landing gear at the right time through prompt messages on the display.

As mentioned before, the first two missions let users fly the SU 30MKI and Mi 17V5 helicopter. Once the second phase of the game rolls out, users will be able to experience the likes of the M2000, Tejas, Phalcon AWACS, C130, Mi 17, Mi 35 and ALH Dhruv.

In less then a few weeks, Guardians already has more than 50,000 to 1,00,000 downloads, with an average rating of 4.4 out of a possible five stars on Google Play Store.

It is already available on Android for free and will be released for Windows Phone and iOS later this month. The next version of the game - with eight more combat missions - will be released on October 8 this year, which also happens to be our Air Force Day.

As a game, Guardians is a beautifully developed and promising venture. And, as an effort to attract the youth towards a career in the IAF, it is even better.

We would recommend you to download Guardians and try it.

And what better way to sign off than these words that describe the IAF's valour and respect: "Sleep well my mother. Sleep well my father, another beautiful dawn is on its way. Sleep well my sister. Sleep well my brother, there are still stars in the sky..."

[Viv S]

The above is not a sufficient argument for me to question the training pedagogy of IAF. It's taking an easy way out w/o bothering to even check why IAF has three different stages and similar number of types of a/c.

There's no reason why the Hawk cannot be used for the IJT, AJT and LIFT role. As and when the Sitara becomes available it can be used to add to the numbers.

Simple point - at no point in time has IAF asked for 'X' number of AJT which would meet the training requirement of Stage II and Stage III combined. And do away with Kiran in Stage II. Had that been the case, HAL would not have had IJT project to begin with - the imported and locally manufactured Hawk would have replaced them in IAF service.

The IAF has not done so, so far. But when we start contemplating imports of an IJT, it should certainly become a factor.

IAF has stuck its neck out with HAL which has not delivered the a/c so far. And does not look like delivering it anytime soon. And IAF has clear and present requirement for an IJT. Indigenous or otherwise.

Now, unless the Hawk manufactured at HAL comes at a price cheaper or even similar to imported IJT (if there is one!), I don't think IAF will mind buying additional HAWK for Stage II training. But I don't think that is the case.

IMO, per unit cost of HAWK is in INR 135-150 Crore range for an order of 106+17 jets. Now, what is going to be per unit cost of IJT manufactured by HAL? I don't have any numbers for this but would not be surprised if it cost less than 50% of HAWK...even an imported+locally assembled ones would cost 50%-60% of what HAWK does. Why would you want to buy another 80-90 more HAWK and burn a huge hole in your pocket? That HAWK line was at it is supposed to cater to preexisting order for HAWK, so where does this talk of 'wasting' it comes from?

Those numbers are off. BAE Hawk was well under $20 million apiece at the time of the last sale. Lets assume its risen to $25 million in 2014.

Now compare it to the PC-7 MkII - $7 million in 2012. In 2014-15? Closer to $10 million. Package. Two things of note here -

One, the PC-7 is still relatively low end as turboprop trainers go. The PC-21 or Tucano would cost at least twice as much. (The UAE paid $20M each for its PC-21s in 2009.)

Two, the PC-7s were all delivered off-the-shelf from a very mature production line in Switzerland. Licensing building by HAL would considerably increase the price after ToT, licensing and production infrastructure costs are factored in.

Point I'm trying to make is that you can't be sure of getting a high-end turboprop at $15 million in 2014-15. Its highly unlikely that HAL could license build an IJT for that amount.

With all the fixed costs already invested in the Hawk, its not that much more expensive than an IJT import. And I'm not suggesting we buy 80-90 Hawks. Maybe half as many possibly less, with the objective of bridging the gap with a delayed Sitara.

And if a USAF, AdlA or RAF pilot can transition from a turboprop to an AJT without any issues, there's no reason why an IAF pilot trainee shouldn't be able to do the same.

[merlin]

What I didn't understand is that if HAL could build the Kiran Mk1 and Mk2 which is liked by the IAF, how on earth can they screw up so badly with the IJT? Its not like the design skills for an IJT have atrophied so why is the IJT having so many problems (ignoring the engine issues)?

[srai]

...And while we're at it, here are some extracts from a cached copy of Vayu Aerospace article by AM Rajkumar on his test evaluation of Alpha Jet and HAWK in 1986:
(http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... ed_Jet.pdf)
...

...The aircraft could be put into a normal spin, an oscillatory spin, a flat spin and an inverted spin depending upon the control inputs at entry....

...
BTW - here is a relevant extract from IAF RFP:

“Stalling. An unmistakable natural stall warning should be available, irrespective of the configuration. (b) Spinning. The aircraft must be resistant to spin but it should be possible to perform intentional spin up to six turns to either side and recover safely thereafter. The aircraft behavior in the spin should be predictable and consistent

...

I wonder which spin characteristics IJT is failing on and at what points of spin?

• Is it failing on normal spin, or oscillatory spin, or flat spin, or inverted spin? Or all of them?
• Can it do intentional spin turns few times (maybe not 6 times but at least 2 or 3 )?
• How good is it at resisting spin? Is it really hard to put it into a spin? Or does it get into uncontrolled spins during "regular" manoeuvres?

[Sid]

1. Should we induct IJT without spin/stall recovery tests, as Mark 1 fighters.. this is what Shreeman has been emphasizing till now.
2. Should spin/stall recovery be part of training (Shiv's point). Of course it should be, there should be no doubt about it.

No, that is not the point. IJT can enter a spin during various training lessons other than the one where they are being taught to recover from spin! For example, it can stall during recovery from a dive, or an Immelmann, or a spilt S, or a cuban 8, or a loop. What do you do then? Eject? Why do you think that the F-100s, F-104s crashing so much? Were they practicing spin lessons?

Well for that purpose you have Stall warning and safety devices, which I understand cannot completely eliminate pilot from entering a spin but can guide them in 90% of scenarios.

There are -
1> AOA indicator
2> Stick Pusher
3> Stick Shaker
4> AOA limiter
... etc etc.

[Sid]

Some guru says the IJT has assymetry in its design. This leads to the problems in case of trouble.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stall_%28f ... ty_devices

An aerodynamic twist can be introduced to the wing with the leading edge near the wing tip twisted downward. This is called washout and causes the wing root to stall before the wing tip. This makes the stall gentle and progressive. Since the stall is delayed at the wing tips, where the ailerons are, roll control is maintained when the stall begins.

I am just quoting it as is from Wiki, maybe some gurus can comment on it.

[Sid]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dy ... ing_Falcon

F-16 Improvements and upgrades

One change made during production was augmented pitch control to avoid deep stall conditions at high angles of attack. The stall issue had been raised during development, but had originally been discounted. Model tests of the YF-16 conducted by the Langley Research Center revealed a potential problem, but no other laboratory was able to duplicate it. YF-16 flight tests were not sufficient to expose the issue; later flight testing on the FSD aircraft demonstrated there was a real concern. In response, the areas of the horizontal stabilizer were increased 25% on the Block 15 aircraft in 1981 and later retrofitted to earlier aircraft. In addition, a manual override switch to disable the horizontal stabilizer flight limiter was placed more prominently on the control console, allowing the pilot to regain control of the horizontal stabilizers (which the flight limiters otherwise lock in place) and recover. Besides a significant reduction in the risk of deep stalls, the larger horizontal tail also improved stability and permitted faster takeoff rotation.[40][41]

Similarly we imported Mig 29 (initial version) and faced a lot of issues which IAF or Russians fixed over the years.

[Shreeman]

Shreeman sahib - great posts!

thank you, kindly. i am just presenting an outsiders point of view. hopefully seen as constructive.

My last experience with similar dilly-dallying was in sam pitroda days. thus the bias, but probably too old for everyone but folks like the good doctor to remember.

a closed door only gathers dust, a stone in the river gows only moss. let some light in.

there are papers presented on ijt and lca. but i havent even seen a test point coverage discussion in a long while. let alone a discussion of a curriculum. its not a frontline aircraft, not even a combat craft, what ia the point of all this secrecy?

[deejay]

It is not what IJT can do or cannot do but why is HAL not taking it up for IOC? A major challenge will be the DGCA certification of Airworthiness.

In an earlier post, I had tried to answer this as much for myself and as a point of discussion but then I lost it. With some more thought on the issue I have the following observations:
IOC for IJT will require to lay down the below along with many other things.
> Speed Limits (minimum and maximum) Vbs ( Basic stalling speed) will be the minimum speed. This will also cover limits in all flaps and undercarriage combinations without external loads.
> AUW limits (Minimum empty weight, weight with fuel, oil, lubricants,etc)
> T/ Off landing speed regimes for all the above
> C of G limits (max forward, max aft).

These will be supported by graphs, charts, aircraft flight manuals and other paperwork on design. There is a whole lot of certification on engine too for airworthiness but that does not seem to be a problem. Finally all this will have to be proven by actual flight performances.

Since, the IJT is going in for a weight correction any certification now is useless as new certification will be required with changes in weight. I agree that the degree or amount of variation with changes in weight will be little but for the DGCA it will be of little consequence since the approved load - trim chart or equivalent will be different from the actual if the weights are changed.

A clue to this may be found in the HAL tender requirements for weight reduction consultancy, point no. 5

5. The methodology used for analysis and all data generated for this task should be transferred to HAL and the vendor should assist HAL in obtaining the necessary airworthiness certification by providing all required documentation, explanations / clarifications.

Now, HAL is aware of the Spin challenge. HAL was regularly consulted and often participated in Spin evaluations of the Kiran even while IAF was training on it and this I say from personal experience. The HAL engineers and scientists have also called in expert consultants for the IJT spin problem. My guess is that HAL has understood the problem and the solution of the Spin challenge and hence they have moved to the final challenge of correcting the weight limits.

How important are the weight limits: Weight and Engine our beyond my wildest expertise but I believe there are enough such experts at HAL and IAF. For some reason achieving the weight limits seem to be a critically important requirement, so much so that alternatives via imports have been sought. I would not worry about the import so much now since the new government will come in the way of buying from abroad ideas.

Finally, I have not read a lot on the CEMILAC certification part, however, Airworthiness Certification is a feature even on their QR's for IOC. So, DGCA will come in to picture and decision is basically to get the IJT certified in its 'present weight' or 'decreased weight'? Once IOC is obtained, even the IAF will accept that the requirements for FOC (if any) are only add ons and the aircraft is ready for induction.

Disclaimer: I am only attempting to nail the problem with IJT and the above is only my opinion, I may be wrong.

[JTull]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... imits.html

Something interesting!

[Kakarat]

Indian Air Force using World War-II era lighting system at Leh airbase: CAG

[Kakarat]

IAF awaits 'safe' return of last batch of AN-32 fleet

...
As per the arrangement, 40 aircraft were to be refitted at Kiev while the remaining 62 would be done at the Base Repair Depot, Kanpur in collaboration with Ukraine. While 35 AN-32s have returned to India so far, the last batch of five is slated to return in August.
The overhaul programme includes extension of the AN-32’s life up to 40 years besides overhauling and re-equipping the aircraft with new systems.
...

[Siddhu]

A noob question.....

Are the palnes of IAF Insured?? Do we get money when plane crashes ???

[chackojoseph]

They could be subject to transportation, project etc insurance. Both soldiers and war machines cannot be insured.