Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Mar 2015 16:17

Singha wrote:cheapest way of grounding the PAF and PLAAF fwd bases is cheap, stealthy cruise missiles.
brahmos-M & Brahmos for heavily protected SAM sites.

we do not need rafale for that. the location of runways and base facilities are well known from satellite photos.

Rafale or no Rafale runways are extremely hard and deliberately made extra long. Munitions need to penetrate the concrete and dig it up, while other munitions lie unexploded to pose a hazard to repair teams. Runways are also broad enough to allow 2-3 abreast takeoffs and if one side is unusable the other side may still allow takeoffs and landings. Even with all this runways can be repaired overnight by blasting off the unexploded munitions, bulldozing aside the rubble and clearing the surface. Even if CAP aircraft can take off they can cause attrition. Besides enemy missiles can do this to our bases and unless we have repair facilities we won't be able to do much.

Also recce sorties are necessary to assess damage because a convenient satellite may not be available every time. If the runway is repaired overnight a second attack is required the next day. And a third and more until the opposing air force is subdued into quiescence. That may still leave highways and reserve runways that can be used.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Mar 2015 13:48

per Deccan herald photo and caption, a C130J made a 10 min stop at Juhu airfield yesterday to test if it can be used in emergency if main airport were under attack.

methinks its proximity to south mumbai jihadi targets makes it ideal to land NSG there using C130. from there, Mi17 helis could ferry them to the tops of any building or the naval base/golf course.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Mar 2015 07:57

Losses and attrition are a part of war - we need to accept that pilots and aircraft will get shot down and lost.

How many pilots and aircraft are "acceptable" losses on day 1 of a hot war? Assume that the IAF flies 1000 sorties on day 1 with extremely heavy opposition and assume that the IAF has 250 aircraft dedicated to attack. How many losses would have to make us worry that there have been "too many"? How many aircraft lost is "too many"? How many days can we take this level of "too many" losses before our combat strength gets to levels that start making the air force ineffective?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 27 Mar 2015 08:14

reading material for those questions

Attrition in Air Warfare: Relationship with Doctrine, Strategy & Technology
By Arun Kumar Tiwary

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Mar 2015 08:52

shiv wrote:Losses and attrition are a part of war - we need to accept that pilots and aircraft will get shot down and lost.

How many pilots and aircraft are "acceptable" losses on day 1 of a hot war? Assume that the IAF flies 1000 sorties on day 1 with extremely heavy opposition and assume that the IAF has 250 aircraft dedicated to attack. How many losses would have to make us worry that there have been "too many"? How many aircraft lost is "too many"? How many days can we take this level of "too many" losses before our combat strength gets to levels that start making the air force ineffective?

IIRC the IAF analyzed the issue and declared that anything at and above 2% attrition was unacceptable - on a daily basis given the IAFs fleet size it would rapidly become unsustainable. (Caveat: memory onlee)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 27 Mar 2015 09:23

IIRC, some time ago recall reading a report, the a 21 day war with TSP will cost between 70 to 90 aircraft losses. Based on the experience from the previous wars.

Have no clue how this number was arrived at.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Mar 2015 09:30

C130 is not cheap to fly around from delhi. The juhu landing must have been a exercise. But mumbai already has a nsg hub right?

Must be credible intel on a huge swarm type thing in works like 50 jihadis split into 10 teams going at various places in mumbai taking hostages, some blowing up in crowded markets.

Doing it in day and publishing it was to send a message out.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 27 Mar 2015 09:38

Singha wrote:per Deccan herald photo and caption, a C130J made a 10 min stop at Juhu airfield yesterday to test if it can be used in emergency if main airport were under attack.

methinks its proximity to south mumbai jihadi targets makes it ideal to land NSG there using C130. from there, Mi17 helis could ferry them to the tops of any building or the naval base/golf course.

The Juhu airstrip isn't any closer to south mumbai than the Mumbai airport domestic terminal. Even the international terminal, though farther away has a dedicated road to the western express highway now. But the Juhu airstrip does house whatever is left of the Pawan Hans helos and some private ones. Maybe if they don't have quick access to an Mi-17, those could be commandeered.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 27 Mar 2015 09:41

Pratyush wrote:IIRC, some time ago recall reading a report, the a 21 day war with TSP will cost between 70 to 90 aircraft losses. Based on the experience from the previous wars.

Have no clue how this number was arrived at.

Sounds better than 2%. At even 1% losses per day, a 21 day war would take 21% off!! (actually less considering the declining numbers day by day, but still not fun)

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 27 Mar 2015 09:53

Karan M wrote:
Pratyush wrote:IIRC, some time ago recall reading a report, the a 21 day war with TSP will cost between 70 to 90 aircraft losses. Based on the experience from the previous wars.

Have no clue how this number was arrived at.
Sounds better than 2%. At even 1% losses per day, a 21 day war would take 21% off!! (actually less considering the declining numbers day by day, but still not fun)

That's about 0.7% per day assuming the IAF has ~600 combat aircraft (~33 squadrons).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Mar 2015 12:02

Karan M wrote:
shiv wrote:Losses and attrition are a part of war - we need to accept that pilots and aircraft will get shot down and lost.

How many pilots and aircraft are "acceptable" losses on day 1 of a hot war? Assume that the IAF flies 1000 sorties on day 1 with extremely heavy opposition and assume that the IAF has 250 aircraft dedicated to attack. How many losses would have to make us worry that there have been "too many"? How many aircraft lost is "too many"? How many days can we take this level of "too many" losses before our combat strength gets to levels that start making the air force ineffective?
IIRC the IAF analyzed the issue and declared that anything at and above 2% attrition was unacceptable - on a daily basis given the IAFs fleet size it would rapidly become unsustainable. (Caveat: memory onlee)

Yes this is a big percentage. In terms of actual attacking aircraft (assuming 250 at the start) it means 5 a day. In 5-6 days we would have lost 10% of our air force. In 2 weeks 20%. But in those two weeks if we can achieve air dominance by decimating the opponent's ability to put aircraft in the air and taking out his C&C and ability to conduct war, attrition will tail off (as per Jasjit Singh)

For that reason it is important to hit and hit hard and repeatedly like bashing a cockroach with a chappal. But it also means several other things that we have been talking about
1. Having the maximum number of aircraft possible at the start, with no loss of numerical strength due to bureaucratic negligence (biggest possible air force)
2. Having the highest possible serviceability - i.e having over 80 or 90% of aircraft ready for action on any given day. That may mean ignoring non critical faults
3. Doing everything possible to avoid attrition without avoiding combat - ie hitting at standoff ranges where possible and scrupulously avoiding fratricide.
4. Training Training Training

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Mar 2015 12:53

Imo we could lose 15 a day for first 10 days against tsp.
Then tsp af withdraws west and international pressure ends it as stalemate on ground.
They only need to last in the ring for 14 days.

Some of these 15 will be crashes due to creaky old kit pushed beyond a limit daily..had a few during parakram tempo increasei

So while the dharmic work of pounding sargodha etc can go on , we need a strong second line of 150 tejas kitted with heavy bombs to bomb them back to the stone age in 14 days window. Think tornado gr4 for ground attack 150 mk1and tornado adv for air to air with some strike 150 tejas mk2

Secondly we ned
1. Overstock of trained pilots on each type. Increase sqdn pool by 30-50%
2. Additional 50 tejas rotated in and out of mothballs to keep 50 handy to fill out sqdn losses..we can only afford this with tejas
3. Heavy stock of extra engines and groundcrew to pull out problem engines, swap in new and work the bad engine offline
4. Desi bombs and basic lgb in limitless number

If we cannot do this our op tempo remains weak and sickular as usual

These four points which i term sustainability is the diff between the usaf and the rest. Many have shiny kit but cannot run a high intensity fight for a week properly as brutally exposed in libya. Uk and france had to run tails between legs to get extra lgbs from us stocks.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Mar 2015 13:02

nachiket wrote:
Singha wrote:per Deccan herald photo and caption, a C130J made a 10 min stop at Juhu airfield yesterday to test if it can be used in emergency if main airport were under attack.

methinks its proximity to south mumbai jihadi targets makes it ideal to land NSG there using C130. from there, Mi17 helis could ferry them to the tops of any building or the naval base/golf course.
The Juhu airstrip isn't any closer to south mumbai than the Mumbai airport domestic terminal. Even the international terminal, though farther away has a dedicated road to the western express highway now. But the Juhu airstrip does house whatever is left of the Pawan Hans helos and some private ones. Maybe if they don't have quick access to an Mi-17, those could be commandeered.

There is an IAF helo unit at santacruz. The IN has seakings at south bombay. There is no doubt that juhu can accept a loaded hercules.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Mar 2015 14:35

Singha wrote:Imo we could lose 15 a day for first 10 days against tsp.
Then tsp af withdraws west and international pressure ends it as stalemate on ground.
They only need to last in the ring for 14 days.

Some of these 15 will be crashes due to creaky old kit pushed beyond a limit daily..had a few during parakram tempo increasei

So while the dharmic work of pounding sargodha etc can go on , we need a strong second line of 150 tejas kitted with heavy bombs to bomb them back to the stone age in 14 days window. Think tornado gr4 for ground attack 150 mk1and tornado adv for air to air with some strike 150 tejas mk2

Secondly we ned
1. Overstock of trained pilots on each type. Increase sqdn pool by 30-50%
2. Additional 50 tejas rotated in and out of mothballs to keep 50 handy to fill out sqdn losses..we can only afford this with tejas
3. Heavy stock of extra engines and groundcrew to pull out problem engines, swap in new and work the bad engine offline
4. Desi bombs and basic lgb in limitless number

If we cannot do this our op tempo remains weak and sickular as usual

These four points which i term sustainability is the diff between the usaf and the rest. Many have shiny kit but cannot run a high intensity fight for a week properly as brutally exposed in libya. Uk and france had to run tails between legs to get extra lgbs from us stocks.

I just wonder what Vayusena intends to do with those Prithvis?

DexterM · Post by **DexterM** » 27 Mar 2015 15:12

If we read Jagan's book or table on BR, the stats are quite stunning. In the sense that air combat will not lead to as many kills as the number we seem to be thinking of here. AAA is the most likely or if we sleep at the till, then ground attacks by low flying Bundars. I fail to see how the PAF can match the IAF even with current numbers.

Could a Guru explain, with clear squadrons numbers matched against each other?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Mar 2015 15:46

Tsp with american blessing will declare they have no means to diff a prithvi from n- weapon launch and hence has to launch on warning.

Through track2 usa will threaten permanent stop on ge engine support if we go ballistic with prithvi

Your move next.

Dexter we can expect s300 systems in tsp with chinese guest crews for known tier1 targets.
We cannot do anything to stop it barring giving tac nukes to vietnam later

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 27 Mar 2015 22:47

shiv wrote:I just wonder what Vayusena intends to do with those Prithvis?

Runway denial.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Mar 2015 06:24

Singha wrote:Tsp with american blessing will declare they have no means to diff a prithvi from n- weapon launch and hence has to launch on warning.

Through track2 usa will threaten permanent stop on ge engine support if we go ballistic with prithvi

Look at the other titbit posted elsewhere about NCTR being able to recognize Su 30 by fan blade numbers. Munna would greatly benefit from this with an innocent looking Amriki aircraft flying around over shitistan in case of hot war identifying Indian bogeys.

There was a reference in the missile thread to 300 plus AAMs being tested every year by massa. Those tests will not only show how well those AAMs work, they will also show up any weak points. Now here's the rub. Western companies that want to sell AAMs will fill the media with articles about the successes of the AAMs. But the weaknesses of AAMs will be a closely guarded secret - information that can be provided to munna in case of hot war to defeat western derived AAMs used by India.

The combination of technology dominance and media dominance confers some extraordinary powers..

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Mar 2015 06:26

Aditya G wrote:
shiv wrote:I just wonder what Vayusena intends to do with those Prithvis?
Runway denial.

Plausible. This was my guess too. With pinpoint accuracy and warheads with multiple bomblets. Of course Shitistan threatens nuclear war - but what they heck they do that all the time in peacetime also - so they will simply have to be nuked back

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 28 Mar 2015 09:36

Went to HAL museum few days back, saw a yellow painted jaguar takeoff and nice tandav by an army rudra

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Mar 2015 10:24

shiv wrote:
Aditya G wrote: Runway denial.
Plausible. This was my guess too. With pinpoint accuracy and warheads with multiple bomblets. Of course Shitistan threatens nuclear war - but what they heck they do that all the time in peacetime also - so they will simply have to be nuked back

Makes sense also because anti-runway ops are considered the most dangerous - Tornados in GW f.e.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 28 Mar 2015 10:25

Some stats on attrition
http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_ ... 067-47.php

By the time tactics were changed, the Tornado force had flown 148 sorties, with an attrition rage of four percent. “The Gulf War Campaign Diary,” Royal Air Force, www.raf.mod.uk/gulf (last consulted August 1, 2007). The attrition rate per JP233 sortie was two only percent, since each Tornado carried two JP233s. Taylor implies that Tornados carried two JP233s apiece during the Gulf War. Bill Taylor, Royal Air Force Germany Since 1945 (Hinckley, the United Kingdom: Midland, 2003), 162-64. While the Tornado’s overall attrition rate of four percent per sortie was higher than the attrition rates suffered by other coalition aircraft, it was not excessive by historic standards. During the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, Israeli attrition rates varied between two and four percent, the United States suffered an attrition rate of two percent during its attacks on North Vietnamese targets in the Red River Delta in 1967 and again during Operation Linebacker in December 1972, and the Argentines suffered 10 percent attrition during the 1982 Falklands War. Targets in the Red River Delta were the most heavily defended in North Vietnam. Wayne Thompson, To Hanoi and Back: The United States Air Force and North Vietnam, 1966-1973 (Honolulu: University Press of the Pacific, 2000), 143, 305-12. 72 Between four and six hours was a figure for Iraqi airbase repair cited in Centner’s article. The overall commander of British force in the Persian Gulf, General Peter de de la Billière, cited 48 hours. Historically, damaged runways have been repaired comparatively rapidly. For example, during the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, Arab repair teams restored damaged runways after an average of nine to twelve hours. Christopher Centner, “Ignorance is Risk: The Big Lesson from Desert Storm Air Base Attacks,” Airpower Journal, 6, no. 4 (Winter 1992): 25-35; also located in: www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles (last consulted August 1, 2007); and de la Billière, 208-30. 73 Hine's decision temporarily relegated the RAF to unglamorously dropping traditional gravity bombs from medium altitude. To help the RAF return to the cutting-edge of the air offensive, Hine ordered aging Buccaneer bombers to deploy to the Persian Gulf, because only these soon-to-be retired aircraft carried laser-designating pods.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Mar 2015 12:14

I think its better to try and destroy ac on the ground than go after making holes in the runway. with widely dispersed chains of shelters one might need upto around 40 guided munitions per airbase to flatten them all. and you would want to launch from a distance to keep outside strong AA / SAM cover. add another 10 for admin buildings, ATC...another 5 for the fuel farm.....50+ for a single major sargodha or chaklala type base.

nearly real time feed of satellite intel to know which points to target is a must to avoid wasting precious rounds on piles of rubble and inflatable decoys

this is probably where IAF wants to go with the upto 100km range gliding bomb thing. it can surely have hard target unitary warheads and a little booster rocket for a terminal dive..its our desi JSOW

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_Jo ... off_Weapon

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 28 Mar 2015 19:09

HAL turns up heat on HTT-40 programme
By SP's Special Correspondent

March 07, 2015: Dealt a new lease of life after months of friction with the Indian Air Force, HAL's HTT-40 programme has got the necessary boost it needs to move quicker. A first flight of the basic trainer aircraft (BTA) is scheduled for June this year. The MoD has indicated that the HTT-40 will be produced to meet a requirement of at least 68 aircraft (another 38 to be supplied by Pilatus). The MoD has additionally indicated that further orders will be extended to ensure the project, funded fully by HAL through internal accruals, to ensure the costs are fully amortized. The Department of Defence Production, the parent department to HAL, has also asked HAL to pre-plan export of the aircraft and open discussions with interested countries and clubs that may want to import the aircraft. HAL will be studying how to market the aircraft, now just as a basic propeller trainer and leisure flying/aerobatics aircraft, but also for light strike and tactical reconnaissance on the lines of the Embraer Tucano. The HTT-40 was conspicuous by its absence at this year's Aero India after making its debut at the last show in 2013. Sources said that the first prototype at the HAL Airport was getting set for its first flight.

http://www.spsmai.com/exclusive/?id=475 ... -programme

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 28 Mar 2015 22:38

Can't runway denial type activities esp. for FOBs in TSP be taken out with Prahaar types? Only real answer to attrition is more quantity and that is only possible through Tejas. Would love to see the Tejas Mk2 being dropped and the IAF going with 200+ Mk1s. These are excellent fighters at low price and tremendous capability and availability is just around the corner. Concentrate on the AMCA instead of mk2, deliverable by 2030 alongwith Mk1 upgrade to newer common engines.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Mar 2015 06:35

Runway denial is a continuing process, not a one off event. Even if a missile is/missiles are launched - the fact that the runway has actually been disabled needs to be confirmed by recce and repeat recces to make sure it has not come back into action in a few days. Worse than that is the question of mystery air attacks appearing out of nowhere when known runways have been knocked out. Subterfuge like highway takeoffs followed by radar evading flight could allow an adversary to mount attacks that we didn't expect. Also carefully camouflaged "disused" airfields will become active. Decoy airstrips will exist that appear active to attract attacks that are a total waste of time. The IAF itself has done all this and more and it is to be expected that all competent air forces will do this. The fact that we would try and disable runways and other assets is an open fact so any adversary would make sure everything is hidden, dispersed and fortified with good recovery facilities. In general we cannot assume that an enemy will let us off easily and cop out after first day's runway denial attacks.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2015 12:27

India’s Combat Aircraft Programmes: Learnings From Past

http://swarajyamag.com/economy/indias-c ... from-past/

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 30 Mar 2015 11:11

Pictures- India accepts first upgraded Mirage-2000 I/TI fighters

Mirage-2000I and Mirage-2000TI carrying 2 MICA IR missiles

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 01 Apr 2015 10:51

Anantha Krishnan M ‏@writetake 1h1 hour ago

#BreakingNews HAL conducts successful flight of Jaguar DARIN-III upgraded strike aircraft http://bit.ly/1CvmifO

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 01 Apr 2015 10:55

Good news that!

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 01 Apr 2015 10:55

Anantha Krishnan M ‏@writetake 1h1 hour ago

HAL chief Suvarna Raju says Jaguar DARIN-III upgraded strike aircraft loaded with new systems http://bit.ly/1CvmifO

In November 2012, HAL had carried out the first flight of Jaguar DARIN III upgraded ‘maritime' aircraft, with an unhappy Indian Air Force (IAF) wanting more features to be added on to the aircraft.

"The IAF had some concerns with the Mission Computer used in the maritime aircraft. It was of DARIN-II standard. We have now upgraded all possible systems on the aircraft as per the user requirement," HAL Chairman T Suvarna Raju told OneIndia.

The IAF wants its ageing Jaguar fleet to be upgraded to Display Attack Ranging Inertial Navigation (DARIN-III) standards, a project that was set in motion in 2009.

Three Jaguar prototypes (strike, maritime and trainer) have been set aside for testing the DARIN-III features. Raju says that HAL is mandated to upgrade 59 Jaguars that were inducted into the IAF, forming the original batch.

"The strike version has already completed four flights so far and the feedback is satisfactory. Once the trainer too is ready, the IOC (Initial Operational Clearance) phase will come into play," Raju said.

"The Jaguar DARIN-III upgrade will boost the performance of the aircraft with cost-effective and state-of-the-art solution," he added.

HAL's youngest Division - the Mission and Combat System Research & Design Centre (MCSRDC) - undertook the total design and development of DARIN III upgrade, including software, hardware, mechanical, electrical, avionics architecture, design and system design.

The total Operational Flight Programme (OFP) software developed by MCSRDC is embedded in an indigenously-developed open system architecture mission computer hardware.
............
HAL says that upgrade also incorporates primary and reversionary modes of navigation, state-of-the-art man-machine interface (near glass cockpit), Head-Up Display, Engine and Flight Instrument System and Radar Warning Receiver Display Unit.

HAL develops turbo generator for AN-32 (Same link)

In a non-related development, HAL's AERDC Division developed the Gas Turbine Electrical Generator (GTEG-60) for AN-32 aircraft.

The home-grown (GTEG-60) turbo generator is expected to replace TG-16M, meeting the starting requirements of AI-20D aero engine of AN-32 aircraft. HAL officials say that GTEG-60 has a rated power of 60 kW and peak power of 80 kW.

"All the functional and performance parameters of the engine were found satisfactory," an official said.

The first unit was tested successfully to the peak power of 80 kW at Koraput Division. Two consecutive loading cycles were successfully tested. Total 30 normal starts with 'no load' condition and 18 kW, 60 kW, 80 kW loading were carried out during a period of March 9 to 13, 2015.

srin · Post by **srin** » 01 Apr 2015 18:34

Interesting news about Darin-3. So, what did we do in Nov 2012, then ? See the news below from that time ...

Hindustan Aeronautics carries out maiden flight of upgraded Jaguar 'Darin III'

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited today said it has successfully carried out the maiden flight of upgraded Jaguar aircraft 'Darin III'.

"This is significant moment for HAL as the upgrade will result in major operational improvement with regard to all weather air-to-ground, air-to-sea and air-to-air capabilities through incorporation of multi-mode radar," HAL Chairman R K Tyagi said.

The total design from system requirement capture, specification preparation, software, hardware, electrical, mechanical design and development has been done indigenously by HAL at its Mission & Combat System Research & Design Centre (MCSRDC) and aircraft trial modification is done by HAL's Overhaul Division, the city-headquartered defence PSU said.

The fleet compliance will also be carried out by HAL. Software Development Institute of IAF is the design partner for display software development.

Aircraft System Testing Establishment under the leadership of Air Vice-Marshal Raghunath Nambiar takes care of system specification preparation, data analysis and flight testing along with Flight Test Centre of HAL.

The upgrade incorporates new state-of-the-art avionics architecture including Mission Computer, Engine and Flight Instrument System, Solid State Digital Video Recording System, Solid State Flight Data Recorder and additional functions in inertial global positioning system, autopilot, radar and RWR, a HAL statement.

Was the above event sort of IOC of the upgrade and the latest one analogous to the FOC ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Apr 2015 19:44

afaik there is no DARIN-IV so this must be the final cycle and final MLU of the Jags ...I would imagine they will retire from 2025 onward after 10 yrs service.

sad thing the Honeywell F125 engine proposal that would have sorted the hot n high lack of power issue and improved agility and payload margin is not going through.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Apr 2015 06:01

I though an IFR probe was part of DARIN III

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Apr 2015 12:22

Good Read

Crashed Dornier Killed a Woman Lieutenant. Another Played Key Role in Search Operations

member_28657 · Post by **member_28657** » 02 Apr 2015 21:16

I think the Jaguars came with swiveling IFR probes originally but were removed to save weight as we didn't have airborne tankers. I think they were refitted once we acquired tankers.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 03 Apr 2015 12:04

IAF's Rs 9,000 crore mid-air refuelling tanker aircraft hits another hurdle

NEW DELHI: The Rs 9,000 crore project to acquire six Airbus-330 mid-air refuelling aircraft or tankers has received another jolt, with the almost finalized deal now being referred to the defence ministry's vigilance department for clearance.

Sources say the procurement case has been "put on hold" till the vigilance wing vets the allegations raised about old pending CBI inquiries against European consortium Airbus. "The work of the contract negotiations committee (CNC) had been stopped till the vigilance wing ascertains the status of the old cases," said a source.

This comes just before PM Narendra Modi embarks on next week's visit to France and Germany, the main centres for the Airbus Group. The defence ministry on Saturday had also cleared the long-term DRDO project to build advanced AWACS (airborne warning and control systems), which will include mounting indigenous 360-degree coverage AESA (active electronically scanned array) radars on A-330s, at an initial cost of Rs 5,113 crore.

IAF's critical operational requirement for tanker aircraft, which by mid-air refuelling can virtually double the strike range of fighters and bombers, to bolster its strategic reach has had a tortured past. The latest project, which was initiated in 2010, has been hanging fire since January 2013 when the two-engine Airbus-330 MRTT (multi-role tanker transport) aircraft was selected over the four-engine Russian Ilyushin-78.

While both had passed the extensive technical field trials, the A-330 MRTT was selected as the cheaper option in terms of "life-cycle costs", which is a relatively new methodology adopted for defence deals. The IL-78, in turn, was apparently less expensive in the off-the-shelf price.

But since then, the inking of the contract with Airbus has been delayed due to the pending inquiries against the European consortium dating back to the mid-1970s. Last year, as was then reported by TOI, the procurement case was sent to the law ministry for an opinion after a MP wrote to the MoD against it. "But at least one of the CBI cases was found to have been closed due to lack of evidence," said a source.

Then, it took several months for the legal hitch over the change in name of the company from EADS Cassidian to Airbus Group to be resolved in line consonance with the MoD's convoluted procurement procedures. "The original tender, trials and negotiations were done with Cassadian. The manufacturer then rebranded itself as the Airbus Defence & Space. This name change was cleared by our legal advisors this January but the CNC has again been put on hold now for vigilance vetting," he added.

IAF had selected A-330 over IL-78 even under an earlier tender for tankers in 2006 but the deal was scrapped in 2010 after the finance ministry expressed "reservations relating to the competitiveness of the bids and the reasonableness of the price".

sum · Post by **sum** » 03 Apr 2015 13:41

But since then, the inking of the contract with Airbus has been delayed due to the pending inquiries against the European consortium dating back to the mid-1970s. Last year, as was then reported by TOI, the procurement case was sent to the law ministry for an opinion after a MP wrote to the MoD against it.

Errr, then even the AWACs deal should be held up because of this reason?

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 03 Apr 2015 15:31

it is just a way to clear the tanker deal of any political booby-traps left by UPA govt. It shouldn't take too long.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Apr 2015 11:29

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · Apr 2

HAL's 2013-14 annual report says that flight testing of the IJT to +7g and -2.5g has been completed.