Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 15 May 2012 09:54

A quick question - are all these big ticket purchases impacting the value of the rupee and will the penchant of the armed forces to buy phoren ultimately hurt the hen that lays the golden egg?

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 15 May 2012 12:29

Looks like HAL is overstretched. There is a need for another competitor to HAL, preferably in the private sector. Only problem is how they will get a head start on learning about making combat aircraft (fixed and rotary).

Incidentally I have heard many criticisms about HAL from IAF folks in the last two AIs. Slowness to resolve any issue is the primary concern. Looks like the report above confirms that.

srai · Post by **srai** » 15 May 2012 18:51

Cain Marko wrote:Any news on the UAE Rafale deal and the availability of their M2k-5/9? I'd sure like India to get those birds - we have spent enough in terms of infrastructure I'd think to be able to use those. If they can transfer 1 M2K sqd per year for 3-4 years in lieu of new built Rafales directly from France, it'd be really cool and would certainly help address the shortage in the short term for the IAF.

I doubt the UAE Mirage 2000s would be available any time soon. Even if the deal for Rafale is signed today by UAE, it would take at least 3 years before 1st aircraft delivery can take place. Then there has to be FOC on Rafale for the UAE which means another 2 years more. So the first UAE Mirage 2000 available would be after 2018.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 15 May 2012 19:54

nachiket wrote:Kaiser Tufail seems to dismiss the Mirages out of hand, which is surprising as well. Perhaps his concern was because of the condition of the fleet rather than the capabilities of the aircraft.

Read his words again:

while the ground attack Mirage-III/5s and A-5s were sitting ducks for the air combat mission.

PAF operates many variants of Mirage III and Mirage-5s. Some of the Mirage-IIIs are ground attack aircraft.

* Mirage-IIID
* Mirage-IIIRP

Gilles · Post by **Gilles** » 15 May 2012 22:52

Question: Was the IAF IL-78 refueling equipment compatible for Air to Air refueling with that of such western aircraft such as the Mirage 2000 or was some modification made make them compatible ?

If they were compatible as is, I find it amazing that Soviet and Western blocks had agreed to a common and compatible military technology. I mean normally, even their small arms bullets are not compatible.....

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 16 May 2012 17:50

IIRC the airframes are from Ukraine and are fitted with refueling kits from Israel.

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 16 May 2012 18:05

http://www.dutchaviationsupport.com/Art ... saders.pdf
Wonderful article on IL 78 MKI,SU-30MKI and the IAF.Also give details about various exercises conducted with foreign AFs.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 16 May 2012 18:08

It is ironical that India and China have aircraft industries built on an ideology basis which is an anti-thesis to their respective economic models. The Chinese are supposedly communist and the Indians are supposedly Capitalist. China has many analogues of HAL in their nation which goes against the doctrine of Communism which abhors duplication and hence waste of resources. The Soviet Union was guilty of this as well. The Soviets however had no qualms about copying western computer tech wholesale citing prevention of effort duplication. India on the other hand has just one HAL which goes against the doctrine of competitiveness.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 16 May 2012 19:45

Gilles wrote:Question: Was the IAF IL-78 refueling equipment compatible for Air to Air refueling with that of such western aircraft such as the Mirage 2000 or was some modification made make them compatible ?

If they were compatible as is, I find it amazing that Soviet and Western blocks had agreed to a common and compatible military technology. I mean normally, even their small arms bullets are not compatible.....

The IFR probes are of 'western' type rather than Russian design.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 May 2012 19:59

you mean we fitted western IFR probe tips on MKI, Phalcons and Mig29K ?

vina · Post by **vina** » 16 May 2012 20:33

Singha wrote:you mean we fitted western IFR probe tips on MKI, Phalcons and Mig29K ?

Hmm. Wiki says that the Russians reverse engineered the British Probe and Drogue system , which is the NATO standard into the "UPAZ" pod,which is compatible with the British system. I guess we lucked out there and both our Russian origin and Western aircraft can take fuel from the IL-78.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 May 2012 22:43

Vivek K wrote:A quick question - are all these big ticket purchases impacting the value of the rupee and will the penchant of the armed forces to buy phoren ultimately hurt the hen that lays the golden egg?

as proprortion of overall trade balances, these ependitures are relatively small and in themselves will not have a macro economic impact

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 May 2012 22:44

vina wrote:
Singha wrote:you mean we fitted western IFR probe tips on MKI, Phalcons and Mig29K ?
Hmm. Wiki says that the Russians reverse engineered the British Probe and Drogue system , which is the NATO standard into the "UPAZ" pod,which is compatible with the British system. I guess we lucked out there and both our Russian origin and Western aircraft can take fuel from the IL-78.

only USAF uses teh other system no? USN uses probe also?
also, would there have been a guage compatibility issue between western and russian kit?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 23 May 2012 07:56

US probe into fake aircraft parts casts shadow on India deals

koti · Post by **koti** » 23 May 2012 15:20

We have a Chetah crash in Siachen.
Pilot dead.
RIP
Link(Telugu)

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 24 May 2012 22:09

IAF signs Rs 2,800 cr deal for acquisition of Pilatus planes

The Indian Air Force's long pending requirement of basic trainer aircraft can now be met with the acquisition of 75 Pilatus planes starting later this year under a Rs 2,800 crore deal signed today with the Swiss company.
...
...
"Pilatus Aircraft Ltd is proud to announce that IAF has entered today into a contract in excess of 500 million Swiss Francs to procure afleet of 75 PC-7 MkII turboprop aircraft," the company said in a release.

"Delivery of the aircraft and the complete training system is scheduled to commence in fourth quarter this year," it said.

The IAF is procuring the aircraft together with an integrated ground based training system and a comprehensive logistics support package.

"The contract also contains an option clause for extending the scope of this contract within three years from initial signature and we are optimistic that this will indeed be executed," it said.
...
...
Pilatus will also do 30 per cent offsets of the worth of the deal.
"Pilatus has also entered into a separate off-set contract with the Government of India for 30 per cent of the value of this contract and we view this as a major opportunity," the company said.
...

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 25 May 2012 05:05

^^^^ A true red letter day for Indian aviation!!! What pray tell would the offset work entail? Swiss chocolates or watches? I hear thru the grapevine that the Swiss will put in a good word with their European friends for HAL to get an inside track on the contract for building toilet paper holders on the A380. The toilet seats themselves will require ToT but are not completely out of reach.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 25 May 2012 06:02

<del>

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 25 May 2012 06:37

Well, at least the IAF will now get the trainers soon, starting 4th quarter this year.

Or, do you guys think the IAF should do without a basic trainer for the next several years until an indigenous one is developed and tested?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 May 2012 07:11

reports say as of now , the kiran fleet is also depleted and whatever remains is being used for first pilot takeoff and landings (risky part) instead of first training on HPT32 which are withdrawn from service.
Pilatus is a win-win - might make some people rich, but save the lives of good men in the bargain.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 25 May 2012 11:10

What are we discussing here ... the Pilatus deal in today's situation is a no-brainer!

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 25 May 2012 11:31

Yes , only thing is why did it get to the current situation was MOD and ministry sleeping?

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 25 May 2012 23:13

Question to my brethren
On a visit to the jodhpur air base , I was told by a pilot that the Mig-27 he was flying at that time had earlier served in the USSR's AF for a good number of years and then was bought by India. Can anyone shed any light on this matter

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 26 May 2012 01:02

aniket wrote:Question to my brethren
On a visit to the jodhpur air base , I was told by a pilot that the Mig-27 he was flying at that time had earlier served in the USSR's AF for a good number of years and then was bought by India. Can anyone shed any light on this matter

IIRC, there were reports of IAF buying 2nd hand trainers for Mig-23BN/Mig-27 in IAF service.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 May 2012 01:03

mig-27 or mig-23U? I think most of our mig-27's are made in HAL and the rest (were there any not made in HAL) were new ?

added later : rohit mian suspects the same thing.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 May 2012 09:07

I can think of these initial batches of Mig-27 were simply creamed out of Soviet inventory ( operational or reserves ) when our pilots got trained there , till such time that HAL started manufacturing them on their own.

Wasnt the Mig-27 deal as hastily done and procured as the Mig-23 deal when PAF purchased the F-16 ?

Just reminds me of a recent comment of RuAF chief Zelin who mentioned that when they were working on Flanker to take on the F-15 they were debating on what needs to go into flanker design , when he recently got an opportunity to sit inside the F-15E and fly he said he would have been comfortable taking on the F-15E in his Mig-23.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 26 May 2012 09:32

^^^^ Was he suffering from O2 deprivation after the flight when he made that comment?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 May 2012 09:34

Well he would know better as he has flown both types ..the Soviet Mig-23 also differed compared to export models ...its known fact that Mig-23 can keep its own against an F-16.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 26 May 2012 09:48

Austin the only data we have on MiG-23s vs F-16s is Syria vs Israel and the numbers aren't pretty. The F-15E is optimized for ground attack but would still wipe the floor with a MiG-23.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 26 May 2012 10:02

You have to understand its his own perception of what he thinks , AFAIK F-16 beats the F-15 most of times in US internal combat exercise and Israel verus Syria is not similar to US versus Russia.

We have our own history in our subcontinent of PAF versus IAF using Russian/US fighters.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 May 2012 10:27

in the Mig23 era there was F-15A and F-15C both of which were pure play A2A fighters. either could easily have wiped the floor with Mig23 and they did over the Bekaa valley.

the F-15E came much later (late 80s) and has a much higher wing loading due to CFT addition, a vast bombload down to the tailpipes, second cockpit penalty and general 'growth' in avionics. it has A0A limitations vs the old F-15C. but makes up for it with AWACS support, a big AESA radar, world class EW suite, amraam and aim9x. it would still wipe the floor with a upgraded Mig23 if someone wants to try. its the best bomb truck out there, with a secondary A2A role if the CFTs are removed and a shitload of amraams carried.

generally F-15 pilots are dismissive of the F-16 except in wvr I think. and even there, the F-15 with its higher top speed and endurance can choose to safely avoid tricky situations sometimes.

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... bekaa.aspx

few points I learnt from above
- they used HARM/Shrike to get the SAM radar
- followup strike to LGB to wipe the SAM site clean possible, due to radar gone
- they fed in 4 ship formations of F-15/F-16 on well planned paths using E-2 to get advance warning of syrian movements
- good jamming and ELINT of syrian comms

a sort of herald to how the USAF/USN destroyed the Iraqi IADS and AF in desert storm on a much large khanish scale using 1500 fighters...on day1 night I read probably in tom coopers site that again only a limited number of ~15 x F-15 were deployed over southern iraq for CAP but they had complete ELINT, awacs support and much of iraq AF was crushed by airstrikes and tomahawks on the ground itself.

the big boys seem to land devastating blows within the first couple hrs and that sets the tone for rest of war....the opponent ducking and weaving to avoid more punches but never able to regain the initiative back.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 26 May 2012 10:45

Though the F-15 was designed 40 years ago it was built to take on and beat the MiG-25 which the Umrikhans mistakenly thought was an uber fighter. Even today it is the best fighter in the world bar the F-22.

PS. Strike Eagle carries a staggering 23,000 lb bomb load (10,400 kg)

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 26 May 2012 11:59

Vs. an F-15, the flogger is going to have a tough time. It would probly fare much better vs. the F-16 (early models esp) since the 23 did carry some BVR capability and had superb acceleration. Hit and run is all it was meant to do - guided by GCI, no turning/burning stuff.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 26 May 2012 12:07

Austin wrote: ...its known fact that Mig-23 can keep its own against an F-16.

Known? I assume you are referring to the claims of Syrian Mig-23s shooting down Israeli F-16s with R-23s in 1982. But there are even more claims of F-15s and F-16s shooting down Mig-23s with Sidewinders during the same battle. Similar situation during the Iran-Iraq war where Iraqi Mig-23s went up against Iranian F-14s. Both sides claim they were more successful. Considering the amount of propaganda on both sides, nothing can be certain. But I tend to trust the Israelis more here because the Arabs have a history like our paki neighbours of claiming complete victory till the penultimate day of the war before they suddenly find themselves defeated.

Personally looking at the relative TWRs and airframes the only way a Mig-23 can beat an F-16 would be to detect it first and take it out using BVR. In a turning WVR fight, the F-16 would win hands down. The F-15 would be even deadlier because of it's huge radar and massive TWR and low wing loading giving it an all round advantage. The Russian pilot was exaggerating more than a bit methinks.

The IAF would not have gone in for the M2ks and Mig-29s if they had been confident of taking on paki F-16s with the Mig-23s.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 26 May 2012 12:19

Cain Marko wrote:Vs. an F-15, the flogger is going to have a tough time. It would probly fare much better vs. the F-16 (early models esp) since the 23 did carry some BVR capability and had superb acceleration. Hit and run is all it was meant to do - guided by GCI, no turning/burning stuff.

Exactly. The early F-16 versions have a reputation for legendary maneuverability and agility. The only fighter that could really hold its own against it was the Mig-29, unless the fight dragged on for too long and the 29 started running low on juice. Even a Flanker would have difficulty matching the F-16 turn for turn. But it had a lot more staying power in the fight due to its massive fuel load and more missiles to waste. The Mig-23 had none of these. A hit and run BVR attack followed by a quick exit at full afterburner would be the best strategy, assuming the F-16 did not detect it first.

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 26 May 2012 12:38

pandyan wrote:sold as new?

Not exactly clear but i think they they were broken into.IIRC it was not a trainer.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 26 May 2012 13:03

It is said that our own acquisition of MiG-23MF was in response to F-16s. Having said that, the MiG-23 finds good comparison with F-4 Phantom and perhaps even with F-14 Tomcat, but it is outclassed by F-16/Mirage-2000/MiG-29 series. It flies fast at both lo and high levels, and is equipped with BVR missiles.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 May 2012 13:28

didnt a russian Mig23 high flying take down a Paki F-16 once ?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 26 May 2012 18:56

I do not know of a single confirmed F-15 or F-16 loss in air to air combat other than Paki on Paki shooting at Afgan border during Russian invasion in early 80s.Man that made me happy

So total F-16s and F-15s shot down in air to air combat = 0.00000000000000.*

*Pleased see Pukistan Mohammedean on Mohammedean viloence example. (Can't we just get along?)

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 26 May 2012 19:23

^^Here:

http://backfiretu-22m.tripod.com/id11.html

The Soviet MiG-23MLDs were employed to defend the Afghan airspace along side the Afghan-Pakistani border and to defend Soviet strike aircraft from Pakistani F-16s, that in several occasions intercepted, engaged and downed Soviet and Afghan combat aircraft.
The Soviets reported that a Pakistani F-16 was downed and the Soviet MiG-23 pilots, Lieutenant Pochitalkin and Major Osipenko confirmed the F-16 loss but no Soviet Pilot was credited with it; Some of the possible explanations for the loss of the F-16 say the F-16 was shot down either by gun (since no AAMs were carried by the MiG-23MLDs that day) or it was out flown by the MiG-23MLDs thus causing one of the Pakistani pilots to shot down his own wingman other theories say that the F-16 was shot down by bomb fragments from the ground as it flew over after the MiG-23MLDs had drop their bombs or it suffered structural failure while manoeuvring at high G forces as it tried to get the MiG-23MLD on its gunsight, whatever was the reason the F-16 was shot down in combat with MiG-23MLDs .