Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rudra » 04 Dec 2002 02:49

if all we need is ONE strike, use the big stick and deploy all 28 SU30s into the fight. have the -29s scamper at their heels and protect rear areas as point defence orbits.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby NRao » 04 Dec 2002 10:25

Gents, there is a boat load of info on this "sensor" related topic in the latest AWST - of course it is related to the US. But, it does talk about some of the newer tactics used by the Russians in deploying radars and the US counter. Interesting stuff, specially considering that the latest is not even out in the open source.

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Shankar » 04 Dec 2002 11:41

I get a feeling we are overrating pakistans sir defense capability.To blow out couple of bridges and a power plant as bonus which are not heavily guarded anyway we can dare a daylight raid with jaguars maybe a full squadrong with 4-6 fulcrums flying top cover.The mission profile will have to be low-high-low to minimise ingress-outgress damage .Why we should always call on sukhois in a simple CAS type mission difficult to understand when there are other quite capable air assets available for the job.
Sukhois will be required for targets which has a high interceptor defense quotient in the equation -like Kahuta for example.

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rajit » 04 Dec 2002 12:46

I get a feeling we are overrating pakistans sir defense capability.To blow out couple of bridges and a power plant as bonus which are not heavily guarded anyway we can dare a daylight raid with jaguars maybe a full squadrong with 4-6 fulcrums flying top cover.
ahem shankar....maybe you would like to consider what the world's most powerful air arm had to do when pitted against a pretty crappy opposition.IAF isnt the former and PAf isnt the latter.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/el_dorado_canyon.htm

http://www.anawhidbey.org/EldoradoCanyon/EldoradoCanyon_files/frame.htm

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rudra » 05 Dec 2002 02:36

Unkil can afford overkill. when one F15 suffice it send eight. when taliban had no radar or workable SAM net , it spent a couple days pounding rusting hulks on tarmac into rubble.

we indoos play much closer to the edge..

Vishnu
BRFite
Posts: 287
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Vishnu » 05 Dec 2002 07:57

The American overkill during Afghanistan was truly remarkable ... I remember sitting at my "home" in Jabbal Saraj (a bombed out cement factory) and watching B-52s and several fighter aircraft bombing the daylights out of "targets" to the south of Bagram airfield ... All that really existed were a bunch of mud-huts, a handful of fixed air defence guns (no ZSUs) and remnants of the Taliban cavalry (in their transport of choice ... Toyota pickup trucks) ...

This was psych ops at its best ... LGB armed F-15s and F-18s dropping millions of dollars in ordinance in pinpointing and then hitting a bunch of huts !!!

I remember the Yanks used to generally come in at 4:30-5:00 pm ... flying really high up) ... one could hardly see the planes themselves ... and then all hell used to break loose ... massive explosions ...

While we journos tried desperately to "report" the "American air-offensive" live ... the locals used to wait to catch a glimpse of the fire-works display ... For me, the entire situation seemed absurd ... almost "funny" ... the real threat in Afghanistan was from land mines and thieves armed with AKs ...

Just my two penny bit !!!

Vishnu Som
NDTV/STAR News

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rajit » 05 Dec 2002 09:00

Overkill......hmmmmm..this from CNN Gulf War Facts

The Coalition

U.S. casualties: 148 battle deaths, 145 nonbattle deaths

Army: 98 battle; 105 nonbattle
Navy: 6 battle; 8 nonbattle
Marines: 24 battle; 26 nonbattle
Air Force: 20 battle; 6 nonbattle
Women killed: 15

U.S. wounded in action: 467

British casualties: 24, nine by U.S. fire

British wounded in action: 10

French casualties: 2

French wounded in action: 25 (estimated)

Allied Arab casualties: 39

>>>
Contrast with Kargil ("Get on top of that hill and bring them down by the scruff of their necks")

Delayed use of Air Power, Restricted ROE's, lack of proper mountaine warfare clothing /equipment - 700 killed....

But then as someone said "we are 1 billion people....when are we going to use all this manpower!" :roll:

Harry
BRFite
Posts: 365
Joined: 20 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Harry » 05 Dec 2002 18:03

The official figure is 449 killed on the Indian side plus 1000 injured.And only a fool would say that the battle situation at Kargil was the same or comparable to the one in the gulf.And for one thing,operation 'Instant thunder' itself was planned for over six months in the 'Black hole' op room.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rudra » 05 Dec 2002 19:50

Rajatbhai the main restriction is cost not intent.

If we had that kinda cash , I would be playing a couple of chukkers at the 'pindi gymkhana today as the Komissar of N.Pak.

But in reality I had a breakfast of cheap cornflakes and skim milk and am about to head back to salt mines (office)

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby daulat » 05 Dec 2002 19:50

a limited air war potentially consists of

1. take out bridges, marshalling yards and road junctions - make it difficult for PA to move around (coupled with attrition artillery on the LOC)

2. take out a couple of fuel dumps (just for fun) and remind the PA how vulnerable they are

3. systematically LGB known terrorist madrassahs

why?

low collateral damage - hence media friendly ops, frying mad mullahs is ok, no actual damage against PA men and armour - hence not a real war as far as CNN images are concerned, hence no regime change threat

and i just totally love the idea of LGB'ing a post every time there is a terror strike - no ifs no buts, it will happen. would be even better if it could be the home madrassah of the jehadi(s) involved

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rajit » 06 Dec 2002 08:49

Harry thanks for personalising the discussion...only a fool would also believe official figures and not understand the point I was making with regards to what we consider "Overkill" :) .

Its ironical that in a discussion on IAF sensor capabilities that have implicit in them an acknowledgement that one needs to spend good money in order to reduce reliance on "labour-intensive" ways of fighting battles (and bringing down casualty counts) we seem to be chanting the "we are a developing" country mantra again. As someone who lives in the same country the fact is not lost on me ,Rudra, but it's high time our wanna be aspirations of being the next superpower starts getting translated into out allocation priorities....which can mean cutting down manpower numbers and using all the savings accrued from there to fund costly yet critically important sensor / force multiplier purchases.

Harry
BRFite
Posts: 365
Joined: 20 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Harry » 06 Dec 2002 18:40

only a fool would also believe official figures
And just how would you know the exact figures,especially given the completely different situations and differing policies?Do you perhaps think,a generalised equation for calculating battle casualties for every single war on the planet can be formed? :D

And for one thing,the IA would'nt degrade itself by trying to hide the names of those fallen in battle,especially when it is known that casualties were high.There's no such thing as the 'elite' 449.

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby daulat » 06 Dec 2002 18:57

i was thinking about the suggestion of knocking out power stations... given the lack of industry and that all critical areas would have back up gens, hitting their power stations is probably fairly uneffective - might add to the misery of the population and make hospitals ineffective

anyone know the load shedding situation in pakistan?

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Y I Patel » 07 Dec 2002 00:58

Daulat:

The idea could be that causing blackout would bring home to the average Abdul that sponsoring terrorism will not be painless anymore.

All:

In terms of risk, which mission is riskier:

Bombing a stretch of a motorway with cluster bombs

Bombing a power plant or transformer with dumb/smart bombs (take your pick)

Bombing a bridge or pass with smart bombs

The intention here is to do a rough cost/benefit analysis for options we have been discussing so far.

PS
If 4 Jags can do the job, one should still go for 4 Sus if they are available. Since we are discussing very limited strikes here, it is very safe to assume that four or more Su30s will be available. Overkill does not sound sexy but it gets the boys back home. Very important.

PPS
The problem with targeting terrorist camps or madrasas is that they are time sensitive targets. An empty madrasa is a worthless target. An empty terr training camp is a bunch of huts or tents. Getting real time intel about when to hit them is the big block, as prez bubba discovered. Besides, target identification could be horrendously difficult when you are scraping leaves at god knows what speed. Think of the repercussions of a near miss.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Vick » 07 Dec 2002 01:05

Wouldn't the M2Ks be a better choice over the Jags? The M2Ks have better self-defence mechanisms compared to the Jags and basically anything else in the IAF sans MKI. If you are trying to limit the casualties, going in with assests that have the highest chance of survivability would be more prudent. But either way... it's semantics. Which brings up a question, what kind of defensive suites do the Jags (IS) currently have and what will they have after their upgrade?

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rudra » 07 Dec 2002 01:26

bombing the korean built motorway is easy.even a fokker albatross could fly NOE and drop a couple of 5 lb parcel bombs.

But its impact will be minimal. trucks just drive around the craters.

Harry
BRFite
Posts: 365
Joined: 20 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Harry » 07 Dec 2002 01:29

Wouldn't the M2Ks be a better choice over the Jags?
The only problem is that deltas due to their low aspect ratios will suffer unacceptable number of 0.5 g bumps ( 70/minute for the Mirage-III ) at low level,hence the choice for aircraft types like the Jaguar and Mig-27.This brings up an important question -

Though the element of surprise and stealth is regarded as the number.1 priority in modern aircombat,pakistan's ability to intercept targets at really high altitude is poor and their SA-2 missiles are probably even defunct,the crotales haves a limited altitude,AAA is less effective,and BVR and stand-off attacks would be more effective,at high altitude.In contrast,the threat at low level from MANPADS and small arms fire is very high.Is it worth sacrificing the element of surprise for theoretically better survivability in this scenario?

Which brings up a question, what kind of defensive suites do the Jags (IS) currently have and what will they have after their upgrade
At present,there is the ARI.18223 RWR with provision for some external jammer such as the EL/M-8222 and the Matra phimat chaff/flare dispenser.The upgraded one has an internally installed SPJ from Elta and the Tranquil RWR with the related color LCD display and audio warning.

Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Vick » 07 Dec 2002 01:45

Well, the bumps at low level may be acceptable as long as the aircraft is not releasing munitions in that condition. If the a/c flies a hi-lo-hi profile to target, the low level flying should only occur en route to the target. Once the a/c is x km distance away from the target it will pull up, lase, range, lock on, whatever it needs to do to bear the weapons's seekers on the target and fire, then turn and burn.

By ingressing in low, chances of detection by radar is reduced, by firing from med to high alt and standoff distances, the threat from 75% of SAMs in the Pak inventory is nullified. Also, another feature of the M2K that makes it more survivable is the fact that it can more than handle its own against any PAF interceptors and along with better SA, IMO, makes it a better candidate for these types of missions.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby NRao » 07 Dec 2002 02:12

Side question, since:

The only problem is that deltas due to their low aspect ratios will suffer unacceptable number of 0.5 g bumps
Would this problem exist in the LCAs too?

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rudra » 07 Dec 2002 02:52

PRC has been license making the S300-PMU for some years now. I would not be surprised if a few batteries have been quietly handed to Pak for protection of vital zones. We too have been ultra-quiet on the S300 front.

Would be a nasty surprise indeed.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Johann » 07 Dec 2002 03:42

Coercive air campaign are essentially contests of will. As such an attacker should concentrate on targets that by their nature *divide* rather than unify responses in the target regime/group. Hitting power stations would nullify rather than exacerbates the potent class divisions and military/civil tensions in Pakistan that could work to Indian benefit.

Yogi, I'd like to strongly recommend three books that you might find useful. All three are concerned with the use of offensive airpower at the operational level.

"Nato's Air War for Kosovo : A Strategic and Operational Assessment" Benjamin S. Lambeth RAND, 2001

"The Air Campaign: Planning for Combat" Col. John Warden. NDU Press 1988; Brassey's 1989. This monograph was the intellectual foundation behind Instant Thunder.

"Attrition in Air Warfare" Air Commodore AK Tiwary. Lancer, 2000

Raman
BRFite
Posts: 261
Joined: 06 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Niyar kampootar onlee

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Raman » 07 Dec 2002 04:14

Originally posted by Harry:
The only problem is that deltas due to their low aspect ratios will suffer unacceptable number of 0.5 g bumps ( 70/minute for the Mirage-III ) at low level,hence the choice for aircraft types like the Jaguar and Mig-27.This brings up an important question ...
The problem is not low aspect ratio, but low wing loading. In fact lower aspect ratio is better as it gives less leverage for gusts to destabilize the plane. Source: http://www.mindspring.com/~cramskill/windyair.htm

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Shankar » 08 Dec 2002 12:01

Lets not compare US bombing missions -their paranoid action of wasting billions of dollars in destrying huts ten times over is a matter of laughs world over.
We dont have that kind of money nor the resources .
Sukhois are not designed for low level bombing of economic targets like power palnt which are not heavily defended in first place and has not CAP protection.Jaguars are ideal withtheir low level ingress and even dumb iron bombs will be able to bear more explossive tonnage to bear .Sukhois will be very difficult to control at 100 ft or so altitude and vulnerable to AAAs at the point of weapon release.Each kind of aircraft has a role to play and hitting power plants and bridges is not what designers thought of SU-30

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby daulat » 09 Dec 2002 20:20

i still think that mixed formation attacks have a lot of merit. Jags, M2k's and Su30's in a composite package at medium or high alt. given the SAM situation - barge in, knock the door down, pee all over the carpet and then stomp out

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 507
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Y I Patel » 10 Dec 2002 01:23

a note of thanks to everyone who keeps contributing nuggets on how to structure limited air attacks on Pak. Please keep them coming!

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby JCage » 10 Dec 2002 03:09

Someone sugeested a valhalla of all K's,imho unneeded.Also coordination of a flotilla to evade detection and do a quick strike will pose problems.
The way to go,imho is to use the *best* in your inventory effectively in just the numbers required.Otherwise,a 'full scale effort" would necessitate carnage deep in enemy airspace,which we can handle,but the whole point is not to cross the "redlines".
If a simple road blocking action or attacking a terror camp is required,with minimum AD,then the IAF can conduct high alt passes with dumb munition.TWo a/c will be particularly suitable-the MKI and/or the Mirage 2000.
If the target needs to be "marked" to begin with,PGMs would be used.Then high alt weapons delivery could plaster anything between the "smoking areas".
Again ,if speed is the essence and target location is fixed,and the target isnt going to bugger out(abdul jehadi),then use PGM's.

Regards,
Nitin

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 964
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby yensoy » 10 Dec 2002 03:26

Originally posted by Rudra Singha:
bombing the korean built motorway is easy...
So the North Korean missiles are transported via the South Korean road? It's a small world :(

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rajit » 10 Dec 2002 13:07

The Mig 29s automated voice alarm system is called Natasha..any idea if the MKI is equipped with a similar system and if so what's it called?Havent heard of any on the western aircraft in Indian inventory equipped with such a system.

Guys...sorry for a trivial q...but i guess it could be called part of the sensor fit of an aircraft:lol:

Aditya_M
BRFite
Posts: 166
Joined: 01 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: Blighty
Contact:

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Aditya_M » 10 Dec 2002 14:26

Yes, there is a voice alert feature. Not sure if its Natasha though :)

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby daulat » 10 Dec 2002 15:53

perhaps the Su's have Ivana or Ludmilla? ;) But I guess Natasha is better!

the RAF call theirs 'Nagging Nora' cos she's always giving out warnings and stopping the boys having any fun

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby JCage » 10 Dec 2002 22:18

Wheres kapil when we need him?
I'd betcha that the Su30MKi does have one.What i wanna know is whether its in angrezi or rooosian.
"Mona Darling".Name of indoo system. :)

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rudra » 11 Dec 2002 00:00

shweta, sharmila, sushmita, sneha.

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby saint » 11 Dec 2002 00:07

Originally posted by Rudra Singha:
shweta, sharmila, sushmita, sneha.
sh! sh! su-s(a)n(ah)

!!!

tingudu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 19 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India
Contact:

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby tingudu » 11 Dec 2002 09:10

Hi,
The USAF F 15 fleet atleast has the Bitchin' Betty, called so as sometimes she gives warnings where none exist.. :)
The MKI probably has the Rambha/Natasha combo. Ru aircraft called theirs the Natasha as she has/had quite a sultry voice.

Regards,

Aditya_M
BRFite
Posts: 166
Joined: 01 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: Blighty
Contact:

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Aditya_M » 11 Dec 2002 14:21

but then again - there is a reason for that sultry voice - the idea is for the pilot not to panic in such situations :)

daulat
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby daulat » 11 Dec 2002 16:10

Originally posted by Aditya Mandrekar:
but then again - there is a reason for that sultry voice - the idea is for the pilot not to panic in such situations :)
what like hearing a sultry female voice in your ear never made you panic?!?!?!?! :)

I am sure that there must have been psycological tests done to determine what type of voice to use - matronly, sultry, etc.?

member_4949
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 1
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby member_4949 » 12 Dec 2002 16:05

Upgraded Jags get LDPs

http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=103838

LDP: It has been decided to integrate the Laser Designated Pod (which gives precision strike capability) on the upgraded Jaguar fighter aircraft, he said.

Though there has been some delay in LDP integration on the existing Jaguar aircraft owing to limited capacity of the mission computer, it has not restricted the operation of the aircraft to light hours only, he said.

Rajit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 30 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Mumbai

Re: Sensor capabilities of IAF aircraft

Postby Rajit » 12 Dec 2002 17:12

the above article talks about LDP delay bcos of constraints in mission computer.....Nitin / Rakesh has this come up before???...I thought some Jaguars could carry the litening....something doesnt add up here


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests