Transport Aircraft for IAF

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

>> During trials in Ladakh, in the oxygen-thin air of that hot summer day, the IL-76 was unable to land even without a payload. The C-17, to the IAF’s delight, landed and took off with 30 tonnes on board.

thats a data point we were unaware of in the C17 bashing threads. so it seems the IL-76 is restricted to night ops and morning only before it gets hot during summer. our cheen biraders will already know that and factor that into their current estimation of our air buildup abilities - which is marginal at best.

seems to me IAF will get rid of the IL76 airframes quickly once the C17s come online and not bother with upgrading them with a new avionics, refurbishment of worn parts and new engines. prolly sell them off to cargo haulers in the CAR or Africa who will fly any crate with wings and a prayer.

I suspect of the 17 we have not all are serviceable....on a recent trip to dilli I saw one inside a hanger in palam with a thick coat of dust that didnt look like it had flown in quite some time.

it will take 3-5 yrs for the IL-476 production to stabilize and emerge as a viable platform. RusAF needs to put in a big order to guarantee its future to potential export customers.
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by vic »

I think IL-76 should be retired and converted to air to air refueling tankers.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

would still need structural overhaul, fitting of tanks and mission kit and possibly a re-engining to PS90A for better payload and less opex.
all depends on how stable Rus can make Ilyushin spares pipeline..now that they plan to restart IL476.
would be superb to have another 17 Midas though.
vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by vina »

Singha wrote:>> During trials in Ladakh, in the oxygen-thin air of that hot summer day, the IL-76 was unable to land even without a payload. The C-17, to the IAF’s delight, landed and took off with 30 tonnes on board.
Indeed. Thanks to Shukla we know now that the C17 whoops some serious Illyushin A**. The performance of the C-17 in the Bangalore Air show was stupendous. Brilliant tight turns , more like a Fokker triplane flow by von Richtofen than the giant beast that it is and with the top of the line high bypass PW engines, will have commercial airplane like economics and reliability and Boeing and Lockheed (with C-130J) will pull all stops to put up brilliant show in terms of cost, timelines, delivery and most importantly superb operational uptime and tick all the boxes they have as deliverable.

Contrast that with that sorry a** Russian approach to delivering anything within timelines and budget and of course the piss poor operational availability.
it will take 3-5 yrs for the IL-476 production to stabilize and emerge as a viable platform. RusAF needs to put in a big order to guarantee its future to potential export customers.
Forget about the IL-476. Exercise the options on the C-17, get more C130Js or get a license to make them in India , get rid of the An32 and junk the MTA project that will probably never see anything come out of it.

For AARs and Awacs, we need a good twin engine commercial platform derivative. Probably an A310 based Awacs (pick up all the relatively newish) A310s out there in the market and send the airframes for conversion to tankers and Awacs. An A330 will be too much, but a A310/B767 used airframe with a decent life left in them would be best to be put through a low risk conversion program (mil derivatives of both already exist as tankers and awacs). Or maybe a A320/B737 based airframe like in the Wedgetail program would be fine, with a ready made maintenance and engg support available from the commercial operators in India and now spares and other problems.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

737/A320 size is too small for awacs and tankers. A310/767 is where it starts to get viable, with A330/777 even better at the higher end of scale - if you want to refuel Blackjacks (I never give up!), airborne widebody command posts, Phalcons, bomb truck conversions...

must be plenty of 767 floating around or in some boneyard which Boeing can make refuelers for us. likewise for A310 which I think germans and some other euros use for refueler.
luftwaffe has 4 A310MRTT
here it is - they just plastered the passenger windows..so its obviously not purpose built but a older plane
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 0_MRTT.jpg

most of our jags, mirages are now converted to refueling probe
MKI came from day1 with it
rafale will come with it
Tejas will have it
only outgoing bisons and Mig27 dont have it
phalcons and EMB145 have it
C130J can have it (6th one has it fitted)
IL76 have it.

so its kind of silly sitting around nanga with 6 midas when we need atleast 25 more and A310/767 is on the table as used platforms.

usaf is still using 40-50 yr old airframes of the b52/KC135/B707 family routinely, with new engines, overhaul and avionics
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by merlin »

Not good to keep all transport options in the US basket (all nuts in one place to squeeze). Will always need the Il-476 as backup.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

They need at least 10 more C-17s to fulfill requirements (of 25 IL-476, estimated by the Russians) - a total of 20 C-17s that is.

WRT the IL-476, it was supposed to have flown its first flight last month. So far no news. I suspect the issue is funding. RuAF itself, with some huge requirements, has not placed an order so far. My feel is that RuAF is waiting for either China or India to fund these things. I just do not see it in IAF colors - too risky a proposal.

I think Indo-Russo dance is to see who blinks first. What the RuAF wants IAF does not and Russia wants Indian funds. I think India is willing to place more funds in things like FGFA, but not in IL-476.The Russians need it for things like the IL-476 AND the PAK-FA. (I do not blame them for expecting India to fund - that is part of the game.)

That little cargo/transport plane? Step child? Presence has to be acknowledged ever so often, but of not much importance. But, if they can get a boat load of C-130s (need not be Js), then this guy can be let go. That will be a very delicate dance.
Will always need the Il-476 as backup.
Too late I would say. (See above for some details. There are more.)

In fact, it seems to me at least, that it is the Russians that are playing games right now.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

yep the IL476 and MTA are tied together in a complex game we dont fully understand. perhaps $$ for IL476 is tied to starting work on MTA. India needs the MTA a lot more than Rus does, with its huge distances.

I'd say let both go, or like a girl who is polite just dont reply to the boys SMS.
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by member_20453 »

An addtional order of around 20 would be minimum. I think we need to take into account our growing population and incrase in the size of the army over the next few decades, around 50 of these would be perfect.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Prem Kumar »

Rather than wasting time & money on MTA, I'd rather we focus on building a squadron or two of strategic bombers, capable of carrying Nirbhay and air-launched Brahmos.

I really wish even the AMCA was more a stealth bomber (B2-Spirit) type project rather than a medium fighter, so that it can carry a significant amount of ordinance, both strategic and kick-the-door-open types (e.g. HARM).
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by alexis »

Pls check http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/1907 ... ll-airport
C17 seems to be able to land in small strips as per this report!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

alexis wrote:Pls check http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/1907 ... ll-airport
C17 seems to be able to land in small strips as per this report!
Funny, we were talking about such an incidence at the very same airport a few weeks ago.

BTW, an IA Boeing landed at Juhu Airport (mistaking it for the then Santacruz Airport - both had runways oriented exactly)- late 1960s I want to say. They had to take out the seats, etc, load it with just enough fuel. Since the runways (then) were aligned, all it took was takeoff at Juhu and land a few miles (3-4) at Santacruz.
Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Juggi G »

JV with Tata may produce C-130J at Hyderabad : Roger Rose, Lockheed Martin's India CEO
Bharat Defence Kavach

Order Beyond 12 Aircraft Expected from IAF

Image
The aircraft manufacturing American company Lockheed Martin is also hopeful of getting even more orders for this aircraft from India.

In fact, Lockheed Martin is Looking Forward to Manufacture India specific C-130J aircraft in India through a Hyderabad based joint venture called ‘Tata-Lockheed Martin Aero Structures Limited’ setup in 2009.
On asking whether Lockheed Martin at some stage would think of manufacturing C-130J aircraft in India, Rose said, “We are going to see how the JV goes. I personally would like to build an India specific C-130J at the Tata facility in Hyderabad.

I’d like to be able to compete for the AN 32 replacement, for the Avro replacement. I think there’s unlimited potential for that facility down there.

So, the beauty of working with Tata is that they’re helping us drive price points down and if we can get the price point to continue to drop on the C-130J and we could get it down to a certain level and Start Competing in what’s Historically been a Twin-Engine Domain.
Lockheed Martin and Tata had setup a joint venture in 2009 in Hyderabad. As per Government of India rules Indian company Tata have invested 74 percent whereas Lockheed Martin’s investment is 26 percent.

This Unit presently Produces Center Wing Boxes. Rose told that by next year this joint unit will produce every Tail Section on every new C-130J sold around the world to any country will be built in Hyderabad, India.

He did not specify the exact money invested into the JV but told that there has been investment of ‘tens of millions dollars’ and the partner companies are expecting business worth $300-400 millions from this JV. In fact Lockheed Martin intends to use this production as offset credit.

Lockheed Martin is also keen to compete for the ageing Russian made AN-32 and British made Avro transport aircraft fleet replacement. AN-32 fleet is the work horse of the IAF.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Indranil »

I was going through the TATA website. They already say that they have the capability to build the empennage of the C-130J. That is amazing.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

I vote we call this the MTA project and let the Tatas build various versions of the C130J for us including the short version == MTA . long term its a big win for India if we can develop a 2nd vendor outside of HAL who can do complete assembly and overhauling...will definitely tone up HAL from the guaranteed navaratna status and fat profits they have.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by nakul »

A newbie kweschun. Will this TATA venture make us sanction proof in regards to C130J?
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Indranil »

Well, to HAL's credit, the Tatas don't have the capability of designing (yet) ... they have the capability of building to print ... But by Lockheed's own admission, it is building world class products at prices which are lowest in an international global supply chain. That is critical know-how.
Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Victor »

Tata can have a world-class design capability within 6 months if and when the need arises. Its more a question of how much the govt will get out of the way.

The possibility of a Tata-run C-130 plant should be curtains for the MTA.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Surya »

yeah - we need more C130s and variations - the GOI\IAF need to understand and accelerate this
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

the short version (ones we ordered are the stretched version) are quite a bit smaller and pretty much in MTA class
http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/i ... -30_lg.jpg
comparison of the short version with IL76MD shows how small it is
http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/i ... 30H_lg.jpg

this puppy can surely fly anywhere the AN32 can, with a margin of ease.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Surya »

taking off from MSP airport noticed a dozen plus ANG C 130s

obviously the older version - much shorter than ours.

Hardly seem they are used -

wonder how many are sitting around the country logging a few hours a month
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

we need to get some refurbished C130s before the pakis scrape up the coins to grab that. we should be able to get around 30 airframes with new engines and basic avionics for pure play transport role.
in parallel the brand new ones can also be purchased.
for refuelers also folks like Cy have mentioned there would be plenty of 767 in boneyard or working as cargo haulers which can be converted.
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by pentaiah »

ok ANG I thought Angola. Air National Guard

The shorter versions must be for shorter runways and or improvised runways, could also be tankers for Wild fire fighting to spray stuff.
I am thinking loud here
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

no the short version was the initial version for many yrs (the pakis have it also). the stretched version and more powerful engines came later. both are capable of STOL ops albeit with different payloads and maybe stretch version would need a slightly longer takeoff and landing run at full load.

we need a good mix of both versions, old and new to maximise capex savings and bury the ghost of the MTA forever.

MTA a classic case of "raise no more devils than you can lay down"
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by pentaiah »

I always wondered how to indigenize with out much effort and money
I have found it in Eureka moment

Tata's can make anything only if you ask
take a close look

If you remove the R from the letter in the embossing and change the die/punch on the Press voila its done

( and PSU BEML can share the glory too whats in a name for Tata's they will put extra embossing plate for another 1 lakh no?)

Image



Image[/url]


Pictures taken by me in the recent India Defense Expo Nai Delli
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by vic »

Actually I have repeatedly posted on BRF that MRTA is actually a 80-90 ton MTOW aircraft. It is neither a replacement for An-32, nor suitable for us and nor are we getting any technology/work. C-130 s are more suitable. But it seems MRTA is a done deal. Now C-130 s are targetting to get deal of 56 LTA which while being called Avro replacement will actually be An-32 replacement. Now C-27 is most suitable for this role. TATA has JV with both lockheed and Alenia. The best combination for IAF would have been C-130 s plus C-27 s. But it seems it will be melange of MRTA & C-130s for medlift, LTA perhaps C-27s for light role and heavy mix of C-17s & old IL-76s. So IAF will look like :-

Heavy C-17 and older IL-76
Medium C-130s and later MRTA
Light something like C-27
Lighter still Dornier and Saras
Thereafter hopefully NM-5 s
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by pentaiah »

IIRC AN series are produced in Ukraine hence not so reliable. Besides Ukraine is very much into TSP business.
wiki wrote:On 10 June 2009, an Indian Air Force, An-32 transport plane carrying 13 people crashed shortly after it took off from Mechukha in Arunachal Pradesh, a state bordering China.[13] All the 13 people on board were reported to have been killed. Soon after the crash, India inked a $400 million deal with Ukraine for an An-32 fleet upgrade.[14] This upgrade as reported will extend the life of these transport aircraft by nearly 15 years.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

er is Saras still alive as a saleable product or the book was closed on that. the level of penny funding for such projects is beyond imagining...makes sense only if its a skill building science project.
I am not aware of anybody in india who had placed order for saras or wanted it. to my knowledge its not even flying and no LRIP plans exist.

few yrs down the line we shall obviously have to buy something similar from cessna or embraer !
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Karan M »

Saras is still on, and a LSP level indent exists from the IAF. But yes, we do khadi gramudyog funding of such projects. The Civil transport porgram is now in disarray, it was ambitious, ecosystem oriented (develop industrial base) - but Shri Nair helming it ran into troubles with Govt., and there is little about the program thereafter.
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by pentaiah »

Boss all I ask is a piston engine trainer to replace pushpak, instead of buying from Swiss or Koreans.

One rotax type engine is all beg of Tatas Ambanis Mahendras and even Mulayams

Long back RC Cage promised we will have piston driven UAvs , till date we importing from Israel only.

I have ideas but no funding .... what to do
member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by member_20453 »

The C-27 is indeed a great bird, it is the ideal replacement for the An-32 and Avro, The AVRO replacement contest is for 56 aircraft, I think we should combine that with the eventual An-32 replacement and just order around 120 - 150C-27Js, this is the ideal bird to replace both the AVRO and An-2, it's payload, volume and performance make it the best out there.

That said we need just about 30 to 40 C-17, 30 to 40 C-130J and about 60-80 MTA in order to ensure we can have superior air lift abilities.

I think we need at least 10 battalions of IA Para SF, 10 battalions of SFF, 10 Battalions of Garuds and 10 battalions of Marcos, having a special forces strength of around 50K units is a minimum requirement if we want to take on both china and pak.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by nakul »

I think we need the MTA badly. Khan plays nice only when he sees that the opponent has options. Giving up alternatives and leaving yourself to Khan's mercy is a mistake even Pakistanis try to avoid.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by NRao »

Russia is a problem.

Like anyone else they have two funding streams: the development and the purchase. The Government of Russia (GoR) has been a rather reluctant funding source for development and even more so for purchase. GoR would love a vendor to fund the development and a foreign country to fund their purchase.

Case in point is the IL-476 (a plane very dear to my heart - or lack there of?). The first test plane has been ready to fly for about 6+ months, but have not taken to the skies!!! Issue? GoR is not willing to pay the price that the vendor wants for the finished product. They are low balling it seems. My feel is that everything will fall into place if China (as an example) purchases some 30 of these pups. The price paid by China would allow to compensate for the low balling from GoR.

But, since China has not provided any direction (they are also busy building their own heavy lifter) + GoR not willing to pay the price asked for, etc, the test schedule for the IL-476 gets postponed. (It is supposed to make its first flight in Spet, 2012!!!)

I can almost see the same happening with the MTA, with a major diff: India has funds to purchase the plane and a need for it too.

The ONLY way I would like India to get involved with the MTA: Russia and India SHARE the development (which is close to happening, if not already happened), this includes funding and shared technical development. THEN India establishes a production line (or two) IN India - which has NOTHING to do with ANY Russian efforts for producing the MTA. NOTHING. Zilch. India should operate as though Russia does not exist as far as production - India can source parts and have supply chain within Russia, that is fine. BUT no sub-assemblies, etc from Russia.

I hope that is the case with the FGFA too.

For production Russian timelines should be Russian timelines.
Gilles
BRFite
Posts: 517
Joined: 08 Nov 2009 08:25

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Gilles »

The new production IL-76MD-90A or IL-476, built in Russia, made its maiden flight on Sept 22.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ts-377334/
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Shrinivasan »

I think IAF will be very much interested in this to augment out IL76 fleet, particularly for our refuellers.
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Shrinivasan »

Gilles wrote:The new production IL-76MD-90A or IL-476, built in Russia...
if this helps desh improve the uptime of its IL76/78/Phalcon fleet, it would be a god sent gift... Hope we buy atleast 10-15 airframes and couple years of spares.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

IL76 is not suitable for refuelers or AWACS role, wherein its volumetric fuselage, point load floor strength capability and rough field capability are not that useful or elegant.
the A330 is a better fit there. it trounces the 76 in tanker role and is the std layout for all other AWACS in the world - passenger cabin and some racks above, more racks below, accessed by staircases.

for cargo hauling its a good platform though and given the sheer cost of C17 we can look to get more IL476.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Austin »

In peace time A330 or 787 may be great value for money but what happens in war if the main air field is inoperable for some reason and one has to look at rough field capability or short take off and landing would a military aircraft like Il-76 or C-130 do more justice to the job ?

Thats probably a dilemma many Airforce would go through before taking a decision other wise a A-330 would be equally good for AWACS or Cargo role see no reason one needs a military transport aircraft for these role as well
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2914
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Cybaru »

Time to overhaul over Il-76 fleet to new standards, new engines, new cockpit and perhaps add another 10 476 to the fleet to take the number upto 27/28 and add another 6 to the phalcon fleet.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Transport Aircraft for IAF

Post by Singha »

A330 without a low continous floor (gondola for the wheels) cannot match the volume capability of a dedicated cargo plane. it can take pallets between concrete runways. unsuitable for wartime where transhipping from A330 to IL76/An32 for last leg just waste time. and since a il76 can fly across india, its ok. Khan needs big haulers for trans oceanic supply routes and bringing in pallets of food, water, burgers for expeditionary troops.

but for refuelers and AWACS I would expect them to fly from secure rear bases like kalaikunda, nagpur, pune only...even in wartime.
Post Reply