Indian Military Aviation- Jan 10 2012

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Oct 2012 19:46

X Posted from the UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech thread.

IAF to induct the IAI Harop advanced loitering munition / UCAV / suicide drone by next year:

IAF to induct first killer drones

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 05 Oct 2012 20:21

its interesting times

first time we are close to a consensus that we have no idea what the purpose of this purchase is and whether we need this expensive toy

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Oct 2012 20:33

>> We are going to contract for Apache and these will be paid for by the IAF, flown by the IAF and maintained by the IAF," Browne said

and you can get the clue to the ego tussle right there.

since the equal number of Mi35 are going away at some point soon, I figure they could push this file as a "replacement req". ITvity managers always get replacement reqs when someone leaves the co, even when hiring is frozen for new hires.

do as the Munna's do is the motto

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 05 Oct 2012 20:39

Some info from the Livefist blog:

1. Images of the first IAF Pilatus MKII (Click for larger resolution)

2. Also the tanker bids have been opened.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 05 Oct 2012 20:47

IAF getting 22 Apache helicopters: Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne

Fitted with air-to-air missiles, an Apache helicopter has the capability to take on enemy choppers and UAV, providing support to ground troops.

Capable of detecting 256 moving targets and engaging them, the twin-engine Apache is operated by two pilots.

With its array of modern electronics, Apache is considered to be one of the most advanced combat helicopters. It has successfully carried out missions during the 1991 Gulf War between the US and Iraq and then in Afghanistan.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 05 Oct 2012 20:49

Shrinivasan wrote:I don't agree with your point, as late as 2009, HAL delivered Jags to IAF, they have been undergoing upgrades in one form of another... coupled with the re-engine initiative, building couple of SQs would not be a tall order for HAL... the only problem is... HAL has its hands full.

Hmm... I was given to understand the last Jaguar was delivered around 2005. In any event, as you say HAL has its hands full, and there is no mission the Jaguar performs that the Tejas Mk2 can't do better.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 05 Oct 2012 21:27

Surya wrote:
reality is that future warfare will almost certainly involve exclusive employment of smart munitions
kind of like when they predicted future of air to air engagements will be all missiles

smart munitions are expensive and barring khan no one else has them in numbers or can afford it in numbers

Future of air to air engagements is all missiles. A gun in air warfare has the same utility as a pistol in ground warfare. Its light so you pack it in for emergencies, but your primary weapon is still your rifle/SMG or AAM. Abandoning guns may have been premature in 1960 but its a valid decision today at least as far as air to air combat is concerned (it may still have some utility for strafing runs in sanitized air space).

Coming to smart munitions, its not just the US that employs it in numbers. There may be a few around, but I can't remember seeing any pictures of the Eurofighter or Rafale with dumb bombs and the only picture of the Gripen C/D with such a payload I can recall seeing was of one in SAAF service.

Besides we're talking about building a Jaguar now, one which will presumably serve well past 2035. Dumb bombs on the other hand will make way for PGM kits by the end of the decade in IAF service. If we can afford to buy MICAs for the Mirage priced at $2.5 million each, we can afford 50 Paveway kits for the same cost (if not more units of a cheaper Sudarshan kit).

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Oct 2012 22:07

like saying, HAL is out of bounds for Apache maintenance!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 05 Oct 2012 22:40

On the day when a missile becomes a silver bullet, investing in a fighter would be a waste of money

.

I don't see that day coming very soon in this cat and mouse game of missiles vs. counter measures

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 05 Oct 2012 22:42

indranilroy wrote:On the day when a missile becomes a silver bullet, investing in a fighter would be a waste of money .

I don't see that day coming very soon in this cat and mouse game of missiles vs. counter measures

The same thing was said when ICBMs were introduced. Strategic bombers are still being developed.

Shubham · Post by **Shubham** » 05 Oct 2012 23:46

Indian Air Force could have changed 1962 China war outcome: Air chief Browne

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 689705.cms

Not much of a surprise here, the thing worth exposing is that was the political leadership and top military leadership prepared to accept the escalation of conflict if it were to come to that with the chinese.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 05 Oct 2012 23:59

22 is just the beginning, it'll end in tripple digits....

MKI started with 40 and people said it's too big, ego boost issue, IAF should wait for LCA or buy additional mirages from frenchs

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 06 Oct 2012 04:39

Abandoning guns may have been premature in 1960 but its a valid decision today at least as far as air to air combat is concerned (it may still have some utility for strafing runs in sanitized air space).

yet no one is abandoning it

indranil has a point

once it goes the UCAV way it may become more moot

as for comparing aircraft purchases and bomb costs - well all logical but I could argue the darn airfield upgrades which are cheaper and very much needed should have been done.

the air force mandarins run on some diff ideas

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Oct 2012 07:44

If one reads accounts of pilots in air combat - in a desperate situation where a mate is being tracked for shootdown and a pilot has suddenly found an enemy aircraft in from of him, 1000 meters away and closing and he has no gun, he desperately wants something that will effect a kill in less than 2 seconds. No guided missile can ever do that. Guns will not go away. Not for the IAF anyway, no matter what other air forces may decide. They base it on their experience and adversaries. The IAF does the same thing. Even if it is just one twin barrel with a 2 second burst available.

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 06 Oct 2012 08:14

Right on doc. The gun on a fighter is just like a personal piece one carries with him/her while in the wild wild west. It is there for "just in case..." situation.

Anyways, any one can tell me where is this place located? I am talking about the pic post by Indranilroy above. My fiance and I would love to move there

Avram.

Amitabh · Post by **Amitabh** » 06 Oct 2012 11:26

asprinzl wrote:Anyways, any one can tell me where is this place located? I am talking about the pic post by Indranilroy above. My fiance and I would love to move there
Avram.

Stans, Switzerland

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 06 Oct 2012 12:46

Viv S wrote: there is no mission the Jaguar performs that the Tejas Mk2 can't do better.

Beg to differ with you on this one point, sir. The Tejas is a fine aircraft and all no doubt but I don't think it can fly aslow as a Jaguar, carrying the loads it does, at speeds it does and travelling as far as it does.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 Oct 2012 15:17

Surya wrote: yet no one is abandoning it

Its being retained as a last ditch weapon rather than a essential component of the aircraft's weapons mix. Its also a means of future proofing an aircraft; 20 years from now a CIWS-like system may become available for fighters (unlikely but not impossible), in which case expensive retrofits with guns would be required. But as of today with high off-boresight missiles and sophisticated HMDS available, a pilot has little use for a gun.

Also, to be fair, it has some utility at strafing missions, something occasionally requested by ground troops in Afghanistan even if it is of negligible value in a conventional war.

as for comparing aircraft purchases and bomb costs - well all logical but I could argue the darn airfield upgrades which are cheaper and very much needed should have been done.

Not aircraft purchases but specifically the acquisition of the munitions complement. (I haven't been able to reconcile myself with its cost as well as that of the upgrade; one of the reasons I had strong apprehensions about the Rafale purchase.) Point is, PGM kits are not that expensive. For $1.5 billion (not a huge figure compared to other recent orders) the IAF can acquire upwards of 30,000 Paveway kits which is more than enough to fight a full scale war with. A domestic kit may even be cheaper, though given the sheer scale of production in the US, that's not likely.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 Oct 2012 15:24

shiv wrote:If one reads accounts of pilots in air combat - in a desperate situation where a mate is being tracked for shootdown and a pilot has suddenly found an enemy aircraft in from of him, 1000 meters away and closing and he has no gun, he desperately wants something that will effect a kill in less than 2 seconds. No guided missile can ever do that. Guns will not go away. Not for the IAF anyway, no matter what other air forces may decide. They base it on their experience and adversaries. The IAF does the same thing. Even if it is just one twin barrel with a 2 second burst available.

That's the point - the gun is for use in desperate situations and of use only when the pilot is lucky enough to get his foe right in his cross-hairs. While I'm not suggesting guns be dropped altogether, I am arguing that modern air warfare will feature near exclusive employment of missiles and that PGMs in heading in the same direction with regard to ground strike.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 06 Oct 2012 15:37

^^^

It all comes down to the enemy you are fighting. The USA dropped the ball on the F 22 only to realize that older F 15s are doing better. We prepared for a counter value posture in the IAF but had to make changes in the last minute for Kargil type ops. The presence of stealth aircraft will only make a gun more necessary since detection will happen at shorter ranges. No one knows how the next war is going to be fought. They are simply presuming that it will be similar to the previous one.

Against a foe like F 35 with superb EW but poor aerodynamics, gun is a very good idea since there are no decoys for it. The future weapons will have more features not less, that is why we continue to see guns & flares along side missiles & DIRCM.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 Oct 2012 15:54

Bala Vignesh wrote:Beg to differ with you on this one point, sir. The Tejas is a fine aircraft and all no doubt but I don't think it can fly aslow as a Jaguar, carrying the loads it does, at speeds it does and travelling as far as it does.

Range and payload are comparable (the Tejas has a greater number of hardpoints though). With regard to speed , it doesn't have to fly as slow as the Jaguar. The Litening G4 for example can identify ground vehicles at distances well in excess of 50km and large static targets at even larger distances, giving the pilot amply time to plan his attack. Every bit of speed sacrificed to improve the crew's situational awareness and every extra pass he makes to ensure a high degree of accuracy, puts a $30 million aircraft as well as a valuable pilot in further danger. And the savings on unguided bombs in lieu of a $30K bomb kits are simply too low to justify that risk.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Oct 2012 16:03

I had mentioned this earlier. for attacks on hard well defended targets like airbases or a ordnance plant with dispersed facilities, the old way of pairs of jags streaking in low to release 4x1000lb each using CCIP falls behind compared to "new" way of releasing 500lb SDB type weapons from 40km away and having them glide on their own to targets using glonass co-ordinates. and a Tejas will outrun a Jag anytime in that role at medium and high alt. if intercepted the Tejas has a better chance of escaping due to better performance and dynamics. it also has a radar and can defend itself with atleast 2 derby type missiles and use its radar to independently be aware of fwd quadrant threats. other Tejas from same unit can be loaded for close air defence and accompany the strikers. in Jag case they usually need a M2k/Mig29 pair in top cover escort role from another unit.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 06 Oct 2012 16:16

nakul wrote:It all comes down to the enemy you are fighting. The USA dropped the ball on the F 22 only to realize that older F 15s are doing better. We prepared for a counter value posture in the IAF but had to make changes in the last minute for Kargil type ops. The presence of stealth aircraft will only make a gun more necessary since detection will happen at shorter ranges. No one knows how the next war is going to be fought. They are simply presuming that it will be similar to the previous one.

Against a foe like F 35 with superb EW but poor aerodynamics, gun is a very good idea since there are no decoys for it. The future weapons will have more features not less, that is why we continue to see guns & flares along side missiles & DIRCM.

Regardless of your foe, as things stand today or are likely to stand in the near future, a gun is not an alternative to a missile. And both the PLAAF and PAF will probably field HMS sytems on the JF-17 and J-10 within this decade. In most cases, WVR combat will involve one or at most two passes before they take quick shot(s), but the kind of sustaining maneuvering that leads to a gun kill isn't likely, unless the pilots involved have expended their missile complements but still have an urge to duel instead of exiting the combat zone ASAP lest hostile reinforcements show up.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 06 Oct 2012 16:20

I dont think the IAF's "No" means anything at all. As far as I know, the GOI has approved IA's attack choppers.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 06 Oct 2012 16:23

Regardless of your foe, as things stand today or are likely to stand in the near future, a gun is not an alternative to a missile. And both the PLAAF and PAF will probably field HMS sytems on the JF-17 and J-10 within this decade. In most cases, WVR combat will involve one or at most two passes before they take quick shot(s), but the kind of sustaining maneuvering that leads to a gun kill isn't likely, unless the pilots involved have expended their missile complements but still have an urge to duel instead of exiting the combat zone ASAP lest hostile reinforcements show up.

Combat may not always happen between 2 fighters. It can also be between a jet & a tanker or AWACS. In that case, it might be easier to shoot them down with a gun if the missiles are depleted. Moreover, a missile can be jammed or diverted using countermeasures. No one knows how many missiles are going to be utilised to finish a battle. In smaller 5th gen planes with small internal payloads, the gun might decide who is going to win and I don't think pilots will simply exit the combat zone since their missiles have been used up if they believe that the other guy can get on their tail. They would continue with gums.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Oct 2012 16:27

The Jaguar was not designed as a slow and low fighter. It was fast and low with capability to deliver a payload in one pass. It flies fast and low, not slow and low. Its high wing loading is meant for lower drag at low altitude.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Oct 2012 16:45

imo for $1b IAF could have acquired some 50,000 sudarshan LGB kits and throw in another $500mil to get quantities of SDB with wing kits. that would have solved the PGM numbers problem once and for all , and led to a big manufacturing plant being set up as well.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 06 Oct 2012 20:22

Its good news that the Mi-17v5's are capable of night ops according to Browne, it kind of implies that HAL's medium lift chopper is a goner now

Based on Browne's comments on HAL, that it has too much on its plate ad yet needs to deliver on time, they can only move up the value chain if they can delegate lot of work to private SMEs and its definitely a management issue

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 07 Oct 2012 02:37

The NDTV show on IAF choppers posted in the multimedia thread was a real good one,

Weather radar looking out for 40kms? +

LEDs on rotor blade tips, could be used for formation flying signaling similar to a vehicle on a road, the LEDs are modulated with the flight controls, foggy conditions will not be addressed though +

Tail rotor don't have LEDs which is of the most concern while closer to ground Flares

Armouring against small arms fire, is the cockpit glass bulletproof? they need the Nexter gun for counter suppression fire +

Additional fuel tanks, No IFR though, can make use of a wet pylon based refueling probe like the one on C-130j +

Rotor blades should be made foldable so that it can fit in C-17 cargo hold

mission plan -> pen drive -> autopilot -> NVGs for night flying -> next level should make the avionics state-of-the-art for all weather capability +

Auto-hover+

Weapon stations need a major facelift something like the LCH

Vibration control if good enough for a weather radar why not for a multi-mission mode AESA radar? it can play the role of a mobile WLR with the ability to fly at altitude helps in mountainous terrain

Hope snipers can be carried as well like those seen on Chetak's in piracy patrols

Wire cutters +

Dollies are missing with the soldiers carrying cartons, no rear ramp either, MAFI karde!

Ruggedized implies mechanical linkages to the flight control surfaces?

Bambi bucket fire fighting system +

Hoisting arm is there +

Women pilots +

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Oct 2012 15:48

some good pix of Lengpui (aizawl) airport mizoram - IAFs new den in NE. like kozhikode and mangalore it is a table top runway.

http://miyzone.blogspot.in/2008/04/leng ... zoram.html

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 07 Oct 2012 17:14

^^

Thanks for sharing this link. This airstrip has come a long way from when I saw (as a kid) in '86. Those days it was serviced only by dorniers and they had to really work it out to land. Many a times due to clouds they would would turn back and return to Silchar w/o landing...

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 07 Oct 2012 21:39

Looks very similar to Gawhati airport.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 07 Oct 2012 22:34

On top of GAGAN assisted navigation, wonder if IAC1 has certain means of enabling landing of carrier aircraft, why don't those systems be suitable in NE areas which might otherwise require the expensive CAT-3 landing systems for all weather operations, other than suitability the other risk is snooping by the northern neighbor

Rajendra was the basis for both a fire control radar and a weapon locating radar and is being AESAized, why wouldn't such a radar with multiple functions be suitable on a Mi-17 instead of just the current weather radar, with the availability of lot of such radar enabled choppers, this hoarding tactic seen on sharing Apache Longbows by IAF might be ameliorated. Such an Mi-17 may not share the flight profile of a attack helicopter but can serve in standoff roles with data linked LCHs being in the lead instead

Helping this is the fact that the AESA radar meant for Tejas Mk2 is in prototype stage at 1/8th the size, it could very well be productionized for a chopper first

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 07 Oct 2012 23:37

Livefist: Shadow Over India's Intermediate Jet Trainer

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 08 Oct 2012 02:15

VinodTK wrote:Livefist: Shadow Over India's Intermediate Jet Trainer

This is a Lifafa article smelling all the way to khanland... But still the IJT saga seems to be longer than our AJT procurement saga?

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 08 Oct 2012 03:20

In a first, IAF puts women pilots in attack mode.

Another male bastion, this time in the air, has gone to women. For the first time ever, the Indian Air Force is preparing two of its women pilots for combat roles.

Flight Lieutenants Alka Shukla and M P Shumathi were trained at the Yelahanka station in flying twin-engine Mi-8, a utility and medium-size assault helicopter. Both pilots are at their operational units where they will continue with their armament and special heli-operations training.

Women pilots were only asked to operate single-engine helicopters such as Cheetah and Chethak, used only on non-combat missions. For Alka, this opportunity came her way after she spent over three years in a Chetak helicopter unit in West Bengal, performing casualty evacuation operations in Sikkim and Bhutan. "When I was at Bagdogra station, my senior told me that I have to go to Bangalore. Initially, it didn't click. By the time I realized the magnitude of the offer, I had all my colleagues congratulating me," she said.

Alka is thrilled by the new combat manoeuvres that she is flying. "I'm being trained in hovering above to enable troops slither down the ropes. This manoeuvre was similar to the ones carried out during the 26/11 strikes in Mumbai," she said. "The two women officers had the same curriculum and training as their male counterparts and they performed very well," said Wing Commander N D Mahajan, chief flying instructor of the unit.

They will be trained in bombing, rocket attack, combat search and rescue, and special heli-borne operations. Deepak Kumar Vats, commanding officer of Alka's 112 helicopter unit, said his unit has twin roles: training pilots who are switching over from single-engine helicopters to twin-engine ones, and an operational role. "As of now, our operations have more to do with civilian aid such as flood-relief operations. But in case of a contingency, our units could be moved to the northwest where Alka may be part of the operations," he said.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 08 Oct 2012 06:19

Vipul wrote:In a first, IAF puts women pilots in attack mode.
Flight Lieutenants Alka Shukla and M P Shumathi were trained at the Yelahanka station in flying twin-engine Mi-8, a utility and medium-size assault helicopter. Both pilots are at their operational units where they will continue with their armament and special heli-operations training.

One thing is surprising, these two pilots are being trained on Mi-8s and not Mi-17s, I think IAF would be using the Mi-8s for almost a decade. I read somewhere that IAF is planning on upgrading its fleet of Mi-8s too.
How many Mi-8s and Mi-17s (earlier versions) does the IAF operate currently?... I know we have around 60 Mi-17V5s...

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 08 Oct 2012 09:08

If some barely literate Afghan goat herder can fly a Mi-8 dodging Talib fire, why can't female officers of the IAF do the same ? This is just ridiculous hype for something that was long overdue.

I'd trust the competence of anybody with an IAF uniform over the types who fly these Russian helos up and down around the world.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 08 Oct 2012 09:34

Brando wrote:If some barely literate Afghan goat herder can fly a Mi-8 dodging Talib fire, why can't female officers of the IAF do the same ? This is just ridiculous hype for something that was long overdue.
I'd trust the competence of anybody with an IAF uniform over the types who fly these Russian helos up and down around the world.

This is indeed long overdue... my point was more on the usage of Mi-8 in the attack configuration. there general consensus was to replace Mi-8s with the new Mi17V5s. Usage of Mi8s in attack config as well as allowing women pilots for this are both welcome moves.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 08 Oct 2012 10:30

My only point here, I am sure Women Pilots are equally capable, however, they should not be put in roles where there is a potential for Paki capture, due to very nature of beast wanting to misbehave with women.