Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

[shiv]

Small correction here. While F-22 has TVC in the pitch axis only, Su-30MKI has it in yaw too. Though AL-31FP has 2D TVC, it is arranged in slightly cross orientation.

I recall reading this on BRF recently but haven't figured out how it will help. In all twin engined fighters yaw can be accentuated somewhat by varying the thrust of one engine relative to the other. If the engine nozzles of the two engines are mounted facing slightly inwards the differential thrust would be accentuated a little bit , and vice versa if the nozzles were mutually directed outwards. But how much practical effect would this have? I do not recall reading of any special maneuvering capability because of this feature.

[Shameek]

I think only the MiG 29 OVT had TV in the yaw axis. I remember watching some videos where they had a camera mounted on the tail to show the movement of the TV system.

[shiv]

The Cobra maneuver – and the less well known but more effective Herbst maneuver

Could you explain why the "Herbst maneuver" is "more effective" than a Cobra. The Cobra was advertised by the Soviets and later the Russians as a maneuver that could be used in combat. The intense jealousy in western aviation circles was visible for me to see in those days as they dismissed the usefulness of the Cobra- until the coming of the F-22 after which the west has a maneuver which they could use and say mine is bigger.

I am curious about your view.

[tsarkar]

Firstly, I believe in the Ayurveda saying that everything on earth has some beneficial property, and one should not arbitarily discount anything. So, every maneuver is relevant in the correct context.

Secondly, there is a BVR vs maneuverability argument on, and I believe both are relevant. BVR in a networked environment can indeed deliver promised benefits. However, in the real world, IFF cannot keep pace with a fast changing situation, no one can take chances with a friendly asset with damaged communications, and BVR may transform into WVR where maneuverability would be required. Many believe maneuverability is irrelevant when one can point and shoot using HMDS. On the contrary, maneuverability becomes even more critical to engage/evade against HMDS equipped adversaries. Also, many believe HMDS is point & shoot, not necessarily so. I'm excluding that since its OT for now.

Lastly, I was wondering how to illustrate the scenarios, then realized that illustrations are available online. Big thanks to the internet.

Now, with regards to the specific maneuvers -

Cobra allows directing sensors & weapons without changing altitude or position. For example, if one detects an enemy flying higher outside radar & EO FoV, conventionally, a climb would be required to put the target in radar/EO FoV, track it and fire. The Cobra, combined with a climb, allows putting the target in radar/EO FoV relatively faster, so one gets a better engagement window.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugachev's_Cobra

Similarly, crossing targets at close range, ie targets zipping across the radar FoV at close range have a very brief engagement window, and are quite difficult to engage conventionally. However, a quarter roll, followed by the Cobra, allows a better engagement window.

Kulbit allows a very tight loop, and benefits are apparent, ie, out-turining to get target within radar/EO FoV better than a conventional loop. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulbit

However, both these maneuvers have a degree of predictability. If one observes an opponent performing Kulbit, one can avoid the vertical loop and disengage.

The J turn/Herbst manuever completely reverses direction while maintaining speed and energy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NASA_ ... iagram.jpg A Kulbit can also do so, but without retaining energy. Hence in certain situations, it can be more advantageous than a Kulbit.

Both Russian and US claims of them discovering and coining the phrase supermanueverability is nonsense. The attitude of rubbishing other's capabilities is similarly nonsense. FWIW, the Herbst manuever is not different from what Max Immelmann did in 1915, as shown here http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... elmann.jpg

The flyers knew the skills of the profession, the purpose of this depiction was

Flight-Lieutenant E.L. Ford (Royal Naval Air Service) for an official manual entitled Practical Flying (March 1918).

So, what general public believes to be a simple Immelmann Roll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immelmann_turn was in practice a complex manuever. The lesson here is that if the pilot is sufficiently skilled, he can well manage air combat with a standard aircraft vis-a-vis super-duper aircraft. Similarly, having a super-duper aircraft doesnt do away with the laborious task of acquiring and maintaining proficiency.

Long before the Russians and Americans advertised this, professionals were already doing so. THe only difference is that today the same manuever can be done faster in much shorter time and space.

[shiv]

Thanks for the response Tsarkar. In fact I have known about the Immelmann turn for over 40 years courtesy Biggles and I was unable to figure out what it was about the Herbst maneuver that was new. There is a great deal of competition between the US and Russia and I have often seen US sources roundly rubbishing anything Russian and attempting to come up with something that they call their own and is "better".

[Gaur]

The Cobra maneuver – and the less well known but more effective Herbst maneuver

Could you explain why the "Herbst maneuver" is "more effective" than a Cobra. The Cobra was advertised by the Soviets and later the Russians as a maneuver that could be used in combat. The intense jealousy in western aviation circles was visible for me to see in those days as they dismissed the usefulness of the Cobra- until the coming of the F-22 after which the west has a maneuver which they could use and say mine is bigger.

I am curious about your view.

Regarding cobra manuever, have you ever seen an IAF Su-30 performing a classical cobra manuever in any airshow? That should give you some indication regarding the IAF's opinion regarding post stall manuevers.
BTW, I am aware of the general argument here that cobra causes stress on TVC nozzles because of which it is not performed by IAF in airshows.

[Indranil]

Regarding cobra manuever, have you ever seen an IAF Su-30 performing a classical cobra manuever in any airshow? That should give you some indication regarding the IAF's opinion regarding post stall manuevers.
BTW, I am aware of the general argument here that cobra causes stress on TVC nozzles because of which it is not performed by IAF in airshows.

I don't know whether you were being sarcastic, but the IAF practices the cobra maneuver as an aerial combat maneuver and also the Herbst maneuver to make tight turns.

[nachiket]

Indranil, I had the same impression as Gaur. I've never seen an IAF Su-30 do the nose-up cobra. I had once read something about a nose-down cobra being performed, but I don't remember where.

[Gaur]

I don't know whether you were being sarcastic, but the IAF practices the cobra maneuver as an aerial combat maneuver and also the Herbst maneuver to make tight turns.

No indranilroy, I was not being sarcastic. What you say is surprising to me and indeed goes against what I have heard. However, I will be happy to be corrected. Could you please point me towards an Indian Su-30 doing cobra manuever? I've searched youtube but without any success. I have come across a video in which a Su-30 with canards was performing a beautiful cobra. However, there was no way to id whether it was an IAF flown MKI or a Russian flown Su-37 (or even MKI/MKM demo).

BTW, I am in no way suggesting that MKI is not capable of performing cobra (that would be ridiculous beyond belief). All I am saying is that IAF does not seem to feel very confident regarding its effectiveness.

[Prasad]

Long long ago during the 75th year celebrations, there was an airshow in Madras by the beach where the IAF brought in a few MKIs. The announcer (IAF personnel) said that the IAF does not do the Cobra during airshows and public demos due to the immense stress it puts on the airframes and the IAF thinks it is just not worth reducing production fighters' airframe life thus. But man, could those birds move! They were beautiful

[nachiket]

Small correction here. While F-22 has TVC in the pitch axis only, Su-30MKI has it in yaw too. Though AL-31FP has 2D TVC, it is arranged in slightly cross orientation.

I recall reading this on BRF recently but haven't figured out how it will help. In all twin engined fighters yaw can be accentuated somewhat by varying the thrust of one engine relative to the other. If the engine nozzles of the two engines are mounted facing slightly inwards the differential thrust would be accentuated a little bit , and vice versa if the nozzles were mutually directed outwards. But how much practical effect would this have? I do not recall reading of any special maneuvering capability because of this feature.

Shiv ji, you have probably seen this video, but in case you haven't...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hq_RTaThNI

The cross orientation can be clear seen from 0.30 onwards. And the controlled spin in the yaw axis shown from 0.50 onwards could be possible due to this.

[Indranil]

I don't know whether you were being sarcastic, but the IAF practices the cobra maneuver as an aerial combat maneuver and also the Herbst maneuver to make tight turns.

No indranilroy, I was not being sarcastic. What you say is surprising to me and indeed goes against what I have heard. However, I will be happy to be corrected. Could you please point me towards an Indian Su-30 doing cobra manuever? I've searched youtube but without any success. I have come across a video in which a Su-30 with canards was performing a beautiful cobra. However, there was no way to id whether it was an IAF flown MKI or a Russian flown Su-37 (or even MKI/MKM demo).

BTW, I am in no way suggesting that MKI is not capable of performing cobra (that would be ridiculous beyond belief). All I am saying is that IAF does not seem to feel very confident regarding its effectiveness.

The original article is in German by Lt. Col. Frank Simon after the recent exercise. Ofcourse he had to soothe the English and German egos that they had not spent too much by buying a plane 2-3 times (based on when you bought it) as expensive as the Su-30MKI.

Anyways he says

"In the training room by the breathtaking scenery of the Himalayas, it goes right down to business. My Indian pilot demonstrated to me how close and hard to maneuver and Su-30 can be me then try for yourself. We fly a variety of maneuvers with and without thrust vectoring, Immelmann, loop, and finally the cobra maneuver. "And although the Jets still below the Himalayan peaks are, the air would seem for the engines of the Sukhoi quite thin, because The Indian pilot like "the cobra" make an angle with the nose down and not up, because he probably fears that the incoming air is not sufficient to support the airplane during the combustion of oxygen.
"In the end we still practice how to deal with the Flanker with the aid of the thrust vector control an enemy who attacks from behind, out-maneuvered and can shoot. To this end, pull the edge after a hard curve sharply upward - it depends on how a cobra. The steep attitude you get into a low speed range in which to counteract the thrust vector control. Now we turn so the thrust vector control - and the elegant nose of the Sukhoi falls at a rapid pace down to aim straight to the stunned opponent: Quick with the helmet visor, an infrared missile intrude on the enemy - and off it, "So much for theory. ...
"Then I ask the pilot, he should do it again and it quickly put the nose back over the horizon in order to follow the enemy, if our intention recognizes and tries to climb over us: But that's what he does not manage. .. The nose of the Flanker is - despite the thrust vector control - too heavy, planned for the maneuver "a Euro Fighter would now have an easy game," The Flanker is sluggish in the air, without speed, we try the same again at the end of the flight - with the same result .
In this case the result is not so amazing: Has she passed the Cobra maneuver was successful and the enemy pilot this is not recognized in time, then the Flanker-C possibly the winner of the duel. However, the Cobra maneuver is alive - no matter who runs what pilots and aircraft - even a little of the legend, as an experienced opponent can guess this maneuver. The rest is done by the inertia of the mass: A heavy fighter aircraft like the Flanker-C is disadvantaged by its high weight if it is set by its exceptional aerodynamics and powerful engines only in a position to take wraps to such a maneuver in general, which Most fighters do not make - not even with a thrust vector control. Just the Treibstoffzuladung the Sukhoi over nine tons weight reached nearly empty weight of the € Fighters themselves: Flanker-C is a heavy weight, a Goliath, even with its strong engine here at a - pushes limits - physical.

Here is an example of the IAF pilot's speaking of the Herbst maneuver (though they don't mention the name) at 2:00.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAlpgOG6z6I

Also, if you remember the (in)famous video of Colonel (I forget his name) describing how the Su-30 was a sitting duck. He explains with his hands at around 7:00 in this video nothing but the difference in hence in the herbst maneuver for F-22 and the Su-30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2siH9W5P4E

[suryag]

I was reading about the maybach 62s and i found this very interesting feature

A glass roof: With the press of a button, the glass roof changes from opaque to clear to let in more light (it’s made from a liquid-crystal membrane of conductive polymer plastic, and an electric current in the crystals changes the view). Another button triggers a cover to close over the glass roof completely.

I think the glass on the cockpits of fighter jets need this feature to fly in the bright daylight when the MFDs wont be all that clear

[Gaur]

indranilroy,
The article by Lt. Col. Frank Simon is very similar to my understanding. Regarding Herbst, I cannot say either way. But regarding the "classical" cobra, my undestanding is that the pilots do not care very much for it. The loss of energy afterwords leaves you a sitting duck.
But then again, this is an old argument which has often been debated. You may not remember, but I had once passionately defended Cobra and other post stall manuevers (you were also very active in that discussion). But now I feel very differently and agree with the other group which says that it a high risk hit and miss business where the hit probability is very less and miss penality is certain defeat.

[shiv]

Shiv ji, you have probably seen this video, but in case you haven't...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hq_RTaThNI

The cross orientation can be clear seen from 0.30 onwards. And the controlled spin in the yaw axis shown from 0.50 onwards could be possible due to this.

That is such a beautiful video and there is so much for me to look at that I will have to watch it 10 times before I start noticing the little details. I will do that.

[tsarkar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hq_RTaThNI The cross orientation can be clear seen from 0.30 onwards. And the controlled spin in the yaw axis shown from 0.50 onwards could be possible due to this.

Su-30MKI exhaust nozzles dont deflect between 12'o clock and 6'o clock. One deflects between 11'o clock and 5'o clock and the other between 1'o clock and 7'o clock. This gives the impression of yaw control.

I recall reading this on BRF recently but haven't figured out how it will help. In all twin engined fighters yaw can be accentuated somewhat by varying the thrust of one engine relative to the other. If the engine nozzles of the two engines are mounted facing slightly inwards the differential thrust would be accentuated a little bit, and vice versa if the nozzles were mutually directed outwards. But how much practical effect would this have? I do not recall reading of any special maneuvering capability because of this feature.

Precisely. One can have a slightly more tighter horizontal turn while being careful not to enter into a flat spin. An aircraft is aerodynamic for movement on the forward direction. Pitch control still retains control forces (airflow) in the forward direction. Not many tangible benefits for TVC in the yaw plane. I believe the offset TV in MKI discussed above leverages all the yaw TV control benefits that are practically available.

BTW, this brings out differences between Astra, Derby and R-77 quite clearly http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mpztBRgdJfQ/T ... 30mki2.jpg

[Rahul M]

Gaur sahab, if I'm not much mistaken one of the rationale behind the cobra and similar PSM is a trade off between energy levels in favour of better nose pointing authority. it's difficult to say either is better per se than the other. likely that individual pilots have their own favoured tactics.

[Indranil]

Gaur Sahab,

I don't think that the pilots would do a cobra when the adversary is half a kilometer behind. In a really close combat the cobra is one extra maneuver that the Su-30 can do while Euro birds can't. It may be that the Su-30 can't take a shot after the cobra but atleast it will not have a bandit at 6 o'clock. Also may be that the opponent will be aware that the Su-30 can do the cobra and try to predict it. He might get the prediction right as well, but if he can't be too close. If he is then to react to this massive deceleration along with sudden gain of height would be impossible with conventional flying!

I remember the conversation you are speaking of. Also, I read a lot about post stall maneuvers from both camps. It was quite undecided till a certain German professor quantitatively proved that post stall maneuvers increased the survivability of an aircraft. He was the first one to quantify the duel. It was a very interesting read, though very complex, I might add. I will try to dig it up. That study is universally accepted.

Independently NASAs studies came to the same outcome! And know what the EF is going for TVC (another A2A platform whose chief pilots said that post stall maneuvers were a waste). Kaveri has been for long time wanting to have TVC. If IAF feels it is a waste, I would say that it would be a waste. Forget about the Russians where both design houses believe in TVC.

US designers built a no holds barred A2A fighter and know what they provided TVC on it! If everybody feels that TVC is useless, then we should have been going the other direction.

I am not saying that the post stall maneuvers is the game changer bla bla ... However it is a capability, an extra option. If the bandit was too close he would have anyways got you, atleast now you have a chance to get back on his tail!

[Gaur]

indranilroy,
First of all, I should make it clear that I am not against TVC and I have no particularly strong opinion regarding other post stall manoeuvres as such. I can hazard a guess that they would greatly help in increasing the instantaneous turn rate which would be highly useful to turn your back to incoming missile (just out of my musharraf..I am not claiming that it used for that). I was talking specifically regarding the classical Cobra.

Regarding TVC. I am told that it has other uses other than PSMs. It greatly reduces the take off distance. Also, it nearly eliminates the skidding (though I am not totally sure what that means). Also, TVC is active during every slight movement of aircraft . Eg: In MKI, the TVC is always turned on ( in a limited mode). These things may not look as glamorous as cobra, but they are no less important. But I guess you already know all this..my point was just that I agree that TVC is a very useful feature. So, there is no disagreement on that count.

Regarding the scenario that you have put forth where cobra may be useful..that is a valid and a popular point. However, like everyone else, you are not taking into account the fact that fighters do not operate alone. So, even if the fighter avoids the enemy at 6 o'clock, it is now a sitting duck nevertheless. And I am not talking about 6 o'clock's wingman only. There is always a leaker aircraft that tries to remain hidden outside the enemy's radar cone. In short, it is a very complex and dynamic issue which I cannot claim to even remotely understand. So, in such a scenario, you could always find some part where xyz may be useful (same applies to the contrary). But, IMHO the usefulness of cobra is not as useful as one would believe.

But I agree that this is just a personal opinion and I cannot really expect anyone to accept it as face value (obviously). So, I am merely expressing my opinion here. Also, I can only repeat the same old arguments that energy conservation is of paramount importance and that aerial combat is a game of patience and is far away from our romantic notions of dogfight. In reality, everyone plays it really safe and waits for the other to commit the first mistake. In such a place, the high risk manoeuvres like cobra are really misfits.

I am not saying that the post stall maneuvers is the game changer bla bla ... However it is a capability, an extra option. If the bandit was too close he would have anyways got you, atleast now you have a chance to get back on his tail!

Totally agree on that.

[Gaur]

.......likely that individual pilots have their own favoured tactics.

Would pilots have their individual tactics? I have my doubts regarding this. Either all the Su-30 squadrons would be practising cobra or none. At most, each squadron would have some uniqueness but IMHO it would never be this big. At least, this is my impression of the forces in general.

Gaur sahab, if I'm not much mistaken one of the rationale behind the cobra and similar PSM is a trade off between energy levels in favour of better nose pointing authority. it's difficult to say either is better per se than the other.

Totally agree with that. There is really no way one can settle that debate and only IAF really knows which side of the argument has more force.

PS: I must really request both you and indranilroy to do away with sahab. I don't think that I have either the age or knowledge on my side to be addressed as such.

[Indranil]

Gaur,

It will be a mistake to think that in asymmetric numbers only the Su-30 is outnumbered. What happens if it 2 on 2? In fact the combinations are exponential with a base which itself is exponential. So one can't really assess all situations. One of the combinations just plays out in an aerial combat. All the designers and builders can give the pilot is flexibility and the cobra is one such flexibility.

This is exactly the reason I wanted to find that paper. Alas I read amongst a lot of things and some time back, can't find it readily now.

I understand the other uses of TVC. Skidding is a phenomenon when the plane's motion is not in the direction of it's longitudinal axis. It could be intentional (produced by rudder) or it could be unintentional during turns. When it is unintentional it can be corrected with the rudder. With TVC, the nozzle does it for you and the pilot doesn't have to worry about corrections.

Anyways we can have perfectly different opinion about post stall maneuvers. I personally like the kulbit more than the cobra ... but I have to read up more about the entry and exit differences between the two.

[Rahul M]

>> Would pilots have their individual tactics? I have my doubts regarding this. Either all the Su-30
>> squadrons would be practising cobra or none. At most, each squadron would have some uniqueness but >> IMHO it would never be this big. At least, this is my impression of the forces in general.

I didn't mean they would behave like mavericks. obviously they will go through the same course but in crunch time they will make their own decisions and in that every pilot might not select the same arrow from the quiver.

[Gaur]

Gaur,

It will be a mistake to think that in asymmetric numbers only the Su-30 is outnumbered. What happens if it 2 on 2?

I was not specifically implying that Su-30s would be outnumbered. I was just presenting my understanding of aerial combat and how it is never as simple a case of getting rid of your tail only. One has to gave enough energy to survive after that too.

In fact the combinations are exponential with a base which itself is exponential. So one can't really assess all situations. One of the combinations just plays out in an aerial combat. All the designers and builders can give the pilot is flexibility and the cobra is one such flexibility.

Agreed and thanks for the explanation regarding skidding.

I didn't mean they would behave like mavericks. obviously they will go through the same course but in crunch time they will make their own decisions and in that every pilot might not select the same arrow from the quiver.

Fair enough.

[akshay]

Does anyone have the current status of IGMDP.. has Akash/Nag moved into Full production?
I know of the orders but beyond that any pictures of operation or deployment ino which army units or areas

[koti]

IIRC IGMDP is deemed complete.
It is no more an active program.

Correct me if wrong.

[atreya]

Which version of the MP5 does the NSG use? I noticed that they have double magazines attached. Which version is that? And do they have to swap magazines once one of them is empty, or can both be fired off continuously?

[Bala Vignesh]

^^^ Its not version specific.. its a method used to reduce the time taken for reloading the gun.. infact its applied around the world on most SMG's and on occasions even on AR's...

[atreya]

Yes, you are right, but I have usually seen two magazines taped together. In these two pics, posted by Hiten in Misc Pics thread, one can clearly see that there is some sort of slot in the gun itself for a 2nd magazine. Am I right?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22051036/2011.0 ... .in_01.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22051036/2011.0 ... .in_02.jpg

[Shameek]

^^ No. AFAIK nothing changes in the gun. It is simply a clip that holds 2 magazines together.

See this: http://www.combathunting.com/HECKLER_KO ... K_MP5.html

[Bala Vignesh]

Gurulog noob pooch..
How come the instructor is not wearing the face mask??? I mean isn't he's the more senior and experienced of the lot, hence he should be covered up better right???

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22051036/2011.0 ... .in_01.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22051036/2011.0 ... .in_02.jpg

[shiv]

Gurulog noob pooch..
How come the instructor is not wearing the face mask??? I mean isn't he's the more senior and experienced of the lot, hence he should be covered up better right???

He has to bark out the orders and make sure the sound blasts through everyone else's mask.

[S_Prasad]

Major Mitali Madhumita being awarded the Sena Medal (Gallantry) by General-Officer-Command-in-Chief Lt. Gen. S. K Singh during the Investiture Ceremony of the South Western Command in Hisar on Friday

[Hari]

Have seen 4 Su 30s in Trivandrum Airbase, Normally we don't see such birds here. Any exercise going on?

[akshay]

i do have a newbie doubt regarding anti tank missiles like nag or javeline...
these missiles have the the range of 4-5km... and for using this missiles tanks should be in a line of sight right...?
in these cases how we can effectively use this weapons...

Both are LOBL(lock-on-before-launch) weapons, when u say LOS u probably mean Milan/Konkur which have manual guidance. The javlin ofcourse is a proven fire-forget missile employing MW radar, Nag uses some Infra red tech+Namica instrumentation to lock on.
someone else can go further on explanation on this

[Bala Vignesh]

Have seen 4 Su 30s in Trivandrum Airbase, Normally we don't see such birds here. Any exercise going on?

Probably coming into the mainland from ANC... IIRC, the car nicobar base housed a detachment of the MKI's? So they could be rotating back to their home base in pune...

[akshay]

Have seen 4 Su 30s in Trivandrum Airbase, Normally we don't see such birds here. Any exercise going on?

were they su30s? there was a report of 4 gripens making a stopover in the south on their way to south asia.

[akshay]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/2010/ ... -none.html

With regards to this BR link can i get some comments specifically about INSAS. I thought INSAS issues was all resolved.

[akimalik]

Promoting indigenous products.
Hi, this was originally w.r.t the LCA induction (or lack of it).
I suppose the IAF needs to go up from its current Sqn strength all the way upto 39-42 Sqns over the next decade.
Some part of this expansion will be fulfilled with foreign a/cs and a certain few from a/cs such as the LCA.
Now to promote indigenous products like the LCA assuming that the LCA is cheaper than a comparable a/c of comparable capabilities.
In that case, if IAF has a restricted budget then to fulfill its quantitative requirements (since they cannot buy the same number of foreign a/cs with the same budget), can't the IAF be nudged/coerced into buying more LCAs?
Can this strategy be used by the MoD to provide a reasonable balance between IAF's aspiration of having the "best of the best" equipment, versus the Indian MIC's current capabilities of being "good amongst the rest"?
My point being that if there is no restrictions presented to IAF then why would it ever go for anything but the very very best to serve its needs.
I bode no ill of IAF, but I am just thinking of what is the best way to nudge them onto the Indigenous bandwagon.
This is kind of like the path that has been tread by the Navy ... with perhaps the smallest budgets of the 3 services, they have still managed to make the most progress. simply because since there was paucity of funds, they had to try and think of more reasonable alternatives. and now they have perhaps started reaping the benefits of their efforts.

[shiv]

Cross post from Military Multimedia thread

can we know that how many LGBs were dropped in kargil war??
i guess less than the few because these bombs were costlier than the lives of soldiers for our govt.

bofors could not hit at exact point but LGBs could,
moreover mig27 and other types were not even fitted with countermeasures to avoid stingers and air force put very ambitious requirements for LCA even before it had flown while their own systems were not fit for war back then.

if an illiterate militant can shoot down a well educated/trained fighter pilot with stinger this proves the human limitation.

can we know that how many LGBs were dropped in kargil war??

I think the total number was six (or maybe eight). India had US guidance kits but not the bombs to put them on. Spanish bombs were modified to use these guidance kits and then used in the conflict. As per IAF source - the maximum amount of damage was eventually done by dumb bombs. I do not think we had an unlimited supply of guidance kits

bofors could not hit at exact point but LGBs could,

Partly wrong. Artillery was often used in "direct fire mode" like shooting a kafir with a rifle - so pinpoint hits were possible in direct line of fire mode when the target was visible on a mountaintop. Artillery is less accurate when it is lobbed 40 km behid a mountain range. Also a 250 kg dumb bomb has the explosive power of 5 artillery shells and can afford to be less accurate

moreover mig27 and other types were not even fitted with countermeasures to avoid stingers and air force put very ambitious requirements for LCA even before it had flown while their own systems were not fit for war back then.

Valid point. Stingers were not even expected and that was an overall failure of Indian preparedness.

[Suneet]

is this true? WHY volunteer?
I am at total loss, please help me understand...

At the outbreak of World War II, the Indian army numbered 205,000 men. Later during World War II the Indian Army became the largest all-volunteer force in history, rising to over 2.5 million men in size

sources...
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORC ... ?g2_page=2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_W ... ite_note-9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Indian_Army