Viv S wrote:Mihir wrote:Gee, I didn't know that India never operated the MiG-27. Or that the Hunters went to Longewala just to sightsee in 1971.
The MiG-27 isn't a CAS bird, its a strike variant of the MiG-23. Only two fixed wing aircraft have ever been developed for CAS; A-10 & Su-25.
In the IAF context, the MiG-27 is very much a CAS bird. Its pilots train extensively for CAS and have nothing but praise for its ability to fly and fight at low and medium altitudes.
Viv S wrote:As for air operations at Longewala, (the majority of which were air interdiction not CAS), they were carried out in an era before MANPADS and mobile air defences.
Air interdiction?
I didn't know the Longewala ops involved striking Pakistani POL dumps and supply lines.
Viv S wrote:You think the pilot can see what's happening on ground zipping along at tree-level with every AAA gun and SAM in the vicinity trying to nail him?
You think the pilot can see what's happening in a confused melee on the ground from more than 30k feet and accurately hit enemy targets?
Viv S wrote:The A-10 has played a stellar role in Iraq and Afghanistan where it did not face any significant air defences. Regardless, its almost certainly on the way out
"Did not face air defences" is not the same as "will fail against air defences". You seem to imagine that air defences are this magic weapon that will sanitize the airspace and prevent aircraft operations. They are nothing of the sort. People tend to forget why strike aircraft started flying low in the first place -- the intent was to avoid medium-range air defences that were taking a heavy toll on incoming flights. Short-range defences were developed to counter this tactic. They work fairly well when there is advance warning of an air attack and knowledge of what direction it is coming from. But they also have plenty of weak spots that can be exploited by skillful pilots and planners to deliver effective fire support. A good pilot exploiting these loopholes and using terrain to his advantage will be done with his attack run before the enemy knows what hit him.
Yes, British Tornadoes did suffer from attrition when flying low. But they could choose to fly higher and avoid them only because the Iraqi medium-range AD system had been rendered completely ineffective by a concerted SEAD campaign. India won't have that luxury anytime soon.
Your point that CAS is inherently *very* dangerous business and will lead to losses against any well-equipped opponent is valid. I just happen to think that bombing from high-altitude, while keeping pilots safer, will not help provide ground support in the Indian context.
It's a pity those A-10s are on the way out. But then again, the USAF won't be fighting the Red Army anymore, so there's that as well. They have very few opponents remaining that have the ability to use massed mechanised forces, organic air defences, and air cover to achieve tactical (or even operational) superiority on the ground. India does, and IMHO, still needs specialist CAS aircraft.
For the record, I don't think the Rafale or Tejas will be good solutions to the CAS problem either. The MiG-27s and Jags will be sorely missed when the are retired. Unfortunately, this is one of the side-effects of the transition to a multi-role force. You run short of specialist aircraft, and have to force platforms that are ill-suited for some roles to fulfill those roles anyway, with less than stellar results.