Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 544
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby ashishvikas » 23 Nov 2016 19:16

Do we have conformed news if Jag actually got 2052 AESA ?

If yes, it will be of great learning experience for HAL for doing this on Tejas Mk1-A.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby vina » 23 Nov 2016 19:32

Pratyush wrote:AESA in not necessarily for air 2 air capabilities. It w also help the jet with accurate mapping of terrain. For weapon delivery. Plus every jag now will have the ability to conduct maritime strike..


You don't need an AESA for that. A good old 2032 will do fine. I seriously doubt they would put in a 2052 on a Jag and waste money. At best in an A2A role, it can be a passive shooter / self defence kind of thing .

A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1147
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby A Sharma » 23 Nov 2016 20:37

Upgraded Jaguar (DARIN III) Aircraft Close to Initial Operational Clearance

Image

Three DARIN I Standard Jaguars have been upgraded to DARIN III Standard by HAL.

The upgrade incorporates new state of the art avionics architecture including the Open System Architecture Mission Computer (OSAMC), Engine & Flight Instrument System (EFIS), Fire Control Radar, State of the Art Inertial Navigation System with GPS and Geodetic height correction, Solid State Digital Video Recording System (SSDVRS), Solid State Flight Data Recorder (SSFDR), Smart Multi-Function Display (SMD), Radio Altimeter with 20000 ft range, Autopilot with Alt Select & HNAV and Identification of Friend or Foe (IFF).

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1687
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Khalsa » 23 Nov 2016 23:51

Finally some good news for this chap

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1687
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Khalsa » 23 Nov 2016 23:53

Wait Wait Wait ....

No new engine ???

What is that Upgrade called or gonna be called ?
I thought we had decided on a single engine as well.

Need a memory refresh ....

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Lalmohan » 24 Nov 2016 00:11

if I read this correctly darin iii jags offer same level of autonomous deep penetration as the F111/Su24/Tornado's now? (and more...)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 24 Nov 2016 01:13

The engines are coming as soon as MoD moves on it. I have faith. This single engine situation is genuine and should be accepted.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Austin » 24 Nov 2016 11:23

An engine or AESA upgrade wont do any good to Jags , Their design is for Low Level DPSA types and being a smaller platform it is limited in space and power requirement among other and are at their end of life , Replacing Jags 1:1 by Tejas or MKI or combination of both should be the way forward. ATM the Darin 3 type upgrade will do well and keep it in service till 2025 atleast and may be 2030

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12146
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Aditya_V » 24 Nov 2016 11:31

A Sharma wrote:Upgraded Jaguar (DARIN III) Aircraft Close to Initial Operational Clearance



Three DARIN I Standard Jaguars have been upgraded to DARIN III Standard by HAL.

The upgrade incorporates new state of the art avionics architecture including the Open System Architecture Mission Computer (OSAMC), Engine & Flight Instrument System (EFIS), Fire Control Radar, State of the Art Inertial Navigation System with GPS and Geodetic height correction, Solid State Digital Video Recording System (SSDVRS), Solid State Flight Data Recorder (SSFDR), Smart Multi-Function Display (SMD), Radio Altimeter with 20000 ft range, Autopilot with Alt Select & HNAV and Identification of Friend or Foe (IFF).


So does that mean upgrade includes

1. A New Engine- possibly Honeywell engine or is it a notional update to the engine

2. Fire Control radar= Elta 2052? Can Jags fire Derby along with ASRAAM now?

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 544
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby ashishvikas » 24 Nov 2016 13:16

Austin wrote:An engine or AESA upgrade wont do any good to Jags , Their design is for Low Level DPSA types and being a smaller platform it is limited in space and power requirement among other and are at their end of life , Replacing Jags 1:1 by Tejas or MKI or combination of both should be the way forward. ATM the Darin 3 type upgrade will do well and keep it in service till 2025 atleast and may be 2030


+1

The 120 twin-engine Jaguars will also get new engines supplied by US major, Honeywell, for an estimated $3 billion.. means $25 million only for Engines per Jag.

In $3 billion, IAF may also buy brand new ~75 MultiRole Tejas Mk1.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2738
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby JTull » 24 Nov 2016 13:39

Jaguar fighter gets 20-year lease of life with DARIN-III avionics

The Indian Air Force (IAF) took a vital step on Wednesday towards boosting its dwindling fleet of combat aircraft. As MiG-21s and MiG-27s retire, forcing the IAF to close down squadrons, a new avionics upgrade for the nuclear-capable Jaguar strike fighter will let it fly for another two decades.

This is Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd’s (HAL’s) new DARIN-III (Darin Three) “navigation-attack” system that allows the Jaguar to do pinpoint bombing. The DARIN-III allows a pilot to feed in the coordinates of targets deep inside enemy territory. Once airborne, the computer’s inertial navigation system directs the pilot to the target, telling him when to releases his weapons precisely.

The IAF’s deputy chief, Air Marshal RKS Bhadauria, flew a Jaguar equipped with DARIN-III in HAL Bengaluru, after which he accorded “initial operational clearance” of the upgraded system.

The IAF’s six Jaguar squadrons (20 fighters in each) are deployed in Ambala, Jamnagar and Gorakhpur. Termed “deep penetration strike aircraft”, the Jaguar destroys surface targets like terrorist camps, air bases and warships with its on-board weaponry, including “new generation laser guided bombs” (NGLGBs); and the lethal Textron CBU-105 “sensor fuzed weapons”, bought in 2010 from America. This effective tank-buster breaks up into many “smart bomblets” that guide themselves to the tanks and penetrate their turrets from above.

The 120 twin-engine Jaguars will also get new engines supplied by US major, Honeywell, for an estimated $3 billion. Each Honeywell F-125N engine delivers 43.8 KiloNewtons (kN) of thrust, significantly higher than the 32.5 kN of the Jaguar’s current Rolls-Royce engines.

Powerful engines are essential for swift ingress into enemy territory and a quick escape after a strike. Enemy radars that pick up the Jaguars would scramble fighters to intercept them.

To deal with these, the Jaguar will be fitted with the EL/M-2052 radar, supplied by Israeli company, Elta. This “active electronically scanned array” (AESA) radar allows pilots to simultaneously track enemy fighters, guide missiles towards them, while also jamming enemy communications and radar. While the Jaguar is primarily a strike fighter, its new AESA radar, coupled with a good air-to-air missile, would provide it a formidable capability against attacking enemy fighters.

Currently, 60 Jaguars --- half the fleet --- will be equipped with DARIN-III and the EL/M-2052 AESA radar.

The Jaguar provides a remarkable story of how indigenous upgrades are cheaply modernising, and extending the life of, a foreign-origin aircraft. In 1978, India signed a $1 billion deal for 160 Jaguars, manufactured by Anglo-French company, SEPECAT. The first 40 aircraft, which were supplied in flyaway condition, came with an out-dated “navigation and weapon-aiming sub-system” (NAVWASS).

As HAL began manufacturing the Jaguar, an Indo-French co-development team began upgrading the avionics to DARIN. From 1982, all Jaguars built at HAL had DARIN systems.

Buoyed by that achievement, the IAF and HAL decided in the 1990s to upgrade the DARIN. The result was the superb, entirely indigenous, DARIN-II, which guides the Jaguar blind, literally to the touchdown point on the runway.

“Even in Ambala’s infamous winter fogs, when you couldn’t see your hand if you extended your arm in front of you, the Jaguars were landing and taking off easily”, says a new retired Jaguar pilot.

The 60-odd Jaguars with DARIN-II will continue to operate that system, while the other 60, which still have the original DARIN, will now be upgraded to DARIN-III.


The IAF is currently the world’s only Jaguar operator. IAF boss, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, stated in October that the upgraded Jaguars would remain in service for the next 15-20 years.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2970
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby tsarkar » 24 Nov 2016 15:30

tejas warrior wrote:In $3 billion, IAF may also buy brand new ~75 MultiRole Tejas Mk1.

...that would be delivered in ??? And what platform would carry out strike duties in the interim period?

Austin wrote:An engine or AESA upgrade wont do any good to Jags , Their design is for Low Level DPSA types and being a smaller platform it is limited in space and power requirement among other and are at their end of life , Replacing Jags 1:1 by Tejas or MKI or combination of both should be the way forward. ATM the Darin 3 type upgrade will do well and keep it in service till 2025 atleast and may be 2030

The platform is a very stable low level strike platform. Unlike Tejas or Rafale or Su-30, it is designed for stability despite turbulence and gusts at low levels. The last airframes were delivered around 2010. Avionics are brand new. AESA radar enables accurate ground mapping in SAR/ISAR modes equal or better than Elta 20600 pod carried in Su-30MKI. Litening offers its own capabilities. ASRAAM offers self protection.

Upgraded Jaguars will take strike duties off Mirage 2000 & Su-30MKI enabling them focus on Air Dominance

MaverickV
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 23 Aug 2016 18:45

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby MaverickV » 24 Nov 2016 15:47

All these upgrades could have been applied to our Indigenous Marut fighters if IAF had the vision to nurture it properly. We could have got the upgraded Adour engines which had been a bane for the Marut and could have made so many improvements and iterations of it. All the tech developed for LCA could have been tested on it as well as benefiting our own programs.
Alas, that was not to be... :(

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Viv S » 24 Nov 2016 21:37

V-22s for India? Aside from carrier logistics and (potentially) AEW&C, one very real role I can see is special operations/counter-terrorism.

Currently the NSG has only four metropolitan hubs in addition to the one at Manesar. If its needed anywhere else in the country, the NSG team will need to get to an airport and requisition an aircraft, civil or military. That will only get it to the closest airport to the target. From there on it needs to commandeer some buses/trucks and their drivers, negotiate traffic jams and then perhaps foot it the rest of the way.

A ready flight of two V-22s based at a central location like say.. Nagpur can take two teams (40 cdos) anywhere within 90% of the country in 2 hours (3hrs for the NE), brief them in the air, rope them down in close proximity to the target and provide persistent aerial/recce support. And, if needed, fire support too through the tail-gunner.

Just to put that in perspective, in rush hour, it takes far more than two hours to get from one end of a typical metro. State authority exercised through hard power and available 24x7, anywhere in the country at a moment's notice. Whether its a local strongmen turned wannabe warlord or an ambushed CRPF team.

Worth spending $1 bn for six units (incl. support)? I'd say so.


The Lowdown On Osprey’s Indian Hover
Shiv Aroor, Nov 22 2016

Does India need the V-22 Osprey? Need. That often powerless little word in the world of military modernisation globally — and certainly in India. Far more powerful impulses edge out straitlaced motivations like actual need in militaries. For instance, diplomatic necessity. Or, as a bite-the-bullet bridge to something bigger. Or, simply, want. So let’s re-frame that question: does India want the V-22 Osprey in any form? Well, here’s the thing. It’s complicated. And Livefist has some exclusive new information indicative of a structured plan Boeing is looking to pursue towards actually landing a deal for the Osprey in India.

India first solicited interest in the V-22 at the start of this decade in late 2010. First and second level of detail presentations were promptly made to the Indian Air Force. In 2012, Boeing confirmed that preliminary discussions were under way and that they saw a good deal of interest from India:

Image

In 2013, the Indian Navy joined the conversation, throwing a glance at the V-22 and thinking of it for the carrier logistics and re-supply role. The navy dialed the US Navy asking for price and availability data on the Osprey platform. In 2015, reports emerged that the Indian military (presumably the Indian Air Force) was interested in procuring six V-22s for ‘rapid troop insertion in border areas’. Things have swum along in the realm of information sharing and presentations so far, understandably with less than a fraction of the expense or aggression being poured into more concrete programmes like the F/A-18 Super Hornet or the successfully concluded Apache & Chinook deals. The V-22, after all, doesn’t address a direct, clearly defined requirement — nor would it immediately figure in a prospective list of aircraft purchase priorities. Nevertheless, Livefist learns there’s a serious campaign afoot.

Top sources at Boeing tell Livefist the company is aiming to bring India on board as an operator of the V-22 Osprey within the next decade — by 2025 to be precise. As part of ongoing shape and capture opportunities, which saw Japan sign on as the first intetnational customer of the V-22 last year, Boeing is looking at 2025 as the year by which India should be a customer of the V-22. It is understood that airframes aimed at India will be from the third production tranche (called Multi-Year Procurement or MYP III) or the U.S. Marines MV-22 Common Configuration – Readiness and Modernization (CC-RAM) — a federal contract opportunity to beef up the Osprey, published earlier this year. This projection suggests Boeing is aiming at both a logistics-resupply role as well as a full-fledged special forces battlefield role for potential Ospreys in India. The U.S. Marine Corps, it has been known for a while, are looking to lethalize their MV-22s with a slew of arms add-ons, including rockets, mini-guns and missiles.

The U.S. Navy, currently validating the V-22 (it will ultimately be called the CMV-22B in naval service) for carrier on-board delivery to replace its C-2A Greyhound fleet starting 2018 has had hiccups. When your correspondent visited the U.S. Navy’s Naval Air Station Oceana in Virginia earlier this month, Commander Scott Miller006, an F/A-18 pilot with many tours on board aircraft carriers sounded skeptical about the Osprey. He highlighted two issues he saw as as big worries: the time it took for a V-22 to fold up (and that when it landed, it pretty much stopped all other air ops on deck), and the fact that its downward pointing nacelle exhaust plumes melted the flight deck surface coating on carriers during tests. Asked for a comment on these two issues, Rick Lemaster, Boeing’s Director, Global Sales & Marketing for Tiltrotor Programs said these were common ‘myths’ about the V-22. He said the Osprey folded up in 90 seconds, and a standard operating procedure had been evolved during carrier landings for Osprey pilots to oscillate the nacelles every few minutes to ensure there was no flightdeck burn. While this to-and-fro between the U.S. Navy and Boeing may be expected to continue, the question is of India.

The Indian Navy has been known for a while to want a variety of carrier-launched capabilities, chiefly logistics & resupply, but also carrier-launched airborne early warning and anti-submarine warfare. Boeing’s Lemaster confirms the programme has been lately looking at early warning radars and other kit that could convert the Osprey into an AEW/ASW/ASuW platform — part of what the U.S. Marine Corps wants for the aircraft anyway.

Starting with the P-8I deal of 2009 and C-17 deal in 2011, Boeing has had a relentlessly successful run with the Indian military, scoring big wins with twin rotorcraft deals with the Indian Air Force and Harpoon missiles for the Indian Navy. Several platforms like the V-22 wait in the wings as it were to service potential Indian interest. These include the AH-6i Little Bird and 737 AEW&C Wedgetail, both part of Boeing’s catalogue on the Indian table. Others like the InSitu Scan Eagle are part of active contests.

But the V-22 faces a combination of challenges in country — budget, acquisition priority in the medium term and a visible absence of any convincing reason to acquire the sort of capability that the Osprey offers to the Indian combat requirement vis-a-vis, say, what the incoming Chinooks would easily deliver. Then again, Boeing’s track record suggests they’ve been able to read Indian requirements and ‘capture’ them pretty well. And they’ve got a specific 2025 deadline to score.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2970
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby tsarkar » 24 Nov 2016 23:25

MaverickV wrote:All these upgrades could have been applied to our Indigenous Marut fighters if IAF had the vision to nurture it properly. We could have got the upgraded Adour engines which had been a bane for the Marut and could have made so many improvements and iterations of it. All the tech developed for LCA could have been tested on it as well as benefiting our own programs.
Alas, that was not to be... :(

Marut had two evolution issues -

1. The low power from its Orpheus engines (not Adour), that impacted acceleration. However, the aerodynamics were so good that once the aircraft reached its cruise speed, even the MiG-21 could not keep up with it. The MiG-21 could've gone supersonic but could not sustain it beyond a few minutes. However, in actual combat the few minutes of supersonic burst of MiG-21 would've been enough to chase & kill the Marut.

2. Lack of sufficient electrical power and space for avionics like INS, etc, to enable accurate navigation in adverse weather. The Maruts operated in Jodhpur and Uttarlai where weather is clear for most of the year.

To solve Problem 1, IAF did ask GoI to pay 1 Cr to RR to develop a higher power Orpheus variant that GoI in its wisdom declined. Problem 2 was unsolvable.

So what did IAF do wrong here?

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1687
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Khalsa » 25 Nov 2016 01:01

The two articles by Ajai Shukla on his blog are quite contradictory.
In the latest one he congratulates and heaps praise on HAL for the upgrades and kind of validates the approach taken on keep a platform current as it ages.
The one below it he criticises the contract walas for not writing the contract right for the P8 because they will not be getting the upgrades as the OEM releases it.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Viv S » 25 Nov 2016 05:34

Khalsa wrote:The two articles by Ajai Shukla on his blog are quite contradictory.
In the latest one he congratulates and heaps praise on HAL for the upgrades and kind of validates the approach taken on keep a platform current as it ages.
The one below it he criticises the contract walas for not writing the contract right for the P8 because they will not be getting the upgrades as the OEM releases it.

Contradictory how? HAL is the OEM in the case of the Jaguar and by rolling out an MLU its just doing the contracted job.

In the P-8's case, particularly because its a new platform, there's a steady stream of upgrades/refinements, most software related that are being released by Boeing. The USN & RAAF gets them immediately, the IN doesn't. Partly because our bespoke contract and to a limited extent because of our non-standard comm gear.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 25 Nov 2016 07:49

tsarkar sahab,

1. You asked 75 Tejas in how much time. I say sir, in the very same time as 75 any other Make in India planes. Paisa feko tamasha dekho. What is the technological challenge to double the width of the pipeline of the supply chain of LCA at every level? At most, it will cost double. Reallistically, much less.

2. You asked what did the IAF do wrong with the Marut. Personally, I don't know whom to blame, or whether such an act is justified with the benefit of hindsight. So I will refrain from the same. The stories are there from both sides. But the results are in front of us.
a. The strengths and weakness of the Jaguar and the Marut are matched, but their fates our not. Jaguar stays relevant today by virtue of lifelong upgrades. Maruts were shelved with some airframes having a mere 30 hours on them.
b. Not just a re-engined Marut, but every other desi attempt at a strike aircraft till the LCA met an earlier demise.
c. Every aircraft in IAF's inventory has been bought by IAF's extended evaluation and recommendation. In such case, I find it very convenient to pass th buck onto a nameless babu or a politician. In my mind, I know I shouldn't blame the IAF. The question I am struggling with now is "how"?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 25 Nov 2016 08:10

Unfortunately this to-and-fro discussion of "blame the babu", "blame IAF" etc can really go nowhere because single individuals are not to blame. It is usually a culture of preferring something over the other. We accept this "culture of this or that" without question in other discussions and it is worth mentioning that factor here as well. For example people say "Indians have a culture of dealing in cash" an assertion that goes unquestioned. Or "Indians like to hoard". Indians have a "culture of preferring vegetarian food". Societies - even organized societies like army, navy and air force have a culture that binds them to certain streams of thought and ties them down to certain memes and the inertia does not encourage change.

And here is something that I have pointed out time and again on BRF. From the time I was a young lad I have noticed a general Indian tendency to be derisive of made in India and/or admiration for foreign. The Amby and Fiat cars are standard examples quoted by all. It is difficult to believe that the same culture does not exist within the armed forces because they are a subset of Indians, not Martians

I am sure the IAF must bear some part of the blame (not all) for the demise of the HF 24. There's no avoiding that.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Austin » 25 Nov 2016 08:24

tsarkar wrote:The platform is a very stable low level strike platform. Unlike Tejas or Rafale or Su-30, it is designed for stability despite turbulence and gusts at low levels. The last airframes were delivered around 2010. Avionics are brand new. AESA radar enables accurate ground mapping in SAR/ISAR modes equal or better than Elta 20600 pod carried in Su-30MKI. Litening offers its own capabilities. ASRAAM offers self protection.

Upgraded Jaguars will take strike duties off Mirage 2000 & Su-30MKI enabling them focus on Air Dominance


The platform was good for its time no doubt but it did just one role and did it well , it was never multirole platform , with advent of FBW the issue of low level gust has been adequately taken care off , M2K pilots interview I read many years back pointed to that.

Jags are small aircraft it is limited in space , engine power , aerodynamic is limted too in what it can do , putting in AESA or New Engine wont make it a Tejas or MKI it improvement is limited at best ...so it is good to have limited improvement for like Darin 2 or 3 but we need to replace Jags with Tejas/MKI

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2330
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Vivek K » 25 Nov 2016 08:26

Amen to the above. IAF must take the responsibility along with corrupt babus for its myopic vision of the future.Investing in a future MIL ind complex has been at the bottom of the IAF's priorities and even lower on the babus/politicos's list.

Urgent heed must be paid and all these fanciful flights - F16/18/35 etc should be avoided. Instead systems that would help enhance the LCA should be bought from friendly nations.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 25 Nov 2016 09:14

I think that the Jaguar's low level gust performance and its lack of manoeuvrability required for multirole are related to its small wings and high wing loading. To that extent I would expect that neither the Mirage 2000 nor the Tejas with their low wing loading would be able to achieve Jaguar like speeds at treetop level. The very feature that makes Jaguar useless in 20,000 plus foot mountain regions makes it superior as a low level intruder. It is another matter that the philosophy of under the radar intrusion at low level has taken a beating with American tactics that have been in the news from 1990 to the present.

The same that was said of the HF 24 could be said of the Jag - if a Jag is retreating at treetop level at just under Mach 1 which aircraft can keep up. Interception would have to be BVR "lookdown-shootdown" with all the difficulties posed by ground clutter requiring some nifty avionics wizardry.

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Austin » 25 Nov 2016 09:38

shiv wrote:I think that the Jaguar's low level gust performance and its lack of manoeuvrability required for multirole are related to its small wings and high wing loading. To that extent I would expect that neither the Mirage 2000 nor the Tejas with their low wing loading would be able to achieve Jaguar like speeds at treetop level. The very feature that makes Jaguar useless in 20,000 plus foot mountain regions makes it superior as a low level intruder. It is another matter that the philosophy of under the radar intrusion at low level has taken a beating with American tactics that have been in the news from 1990 to the present.


No matter what the tactics are , flying low and fast is still the best way to beat the radar specially when you have a DRFM based jammer or better LO Aircraft , The tradiational enemy still remains the ack ack and llqrm types.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7729
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby rohitvats » 25 Nov 2016 11:18

MaverickV wrote:All these upgrades could have been applied to our Indigenous Marut fighters if IAF had the vision to nurture it properly.


Oh! But the IAF did exactly that. Marut was conceived as a fast high-flying interceptor, a fighter bomber if you will. But the engines never allowed it to do what was its original task. But then what did IAF do? Adapt the same a/c with lower powered engines for interdiction duties. And it put up with all the pain which cam from inducting a new type and one that was being built by HAL. From lack of spares to lack of commonality of spares. Everything.

We could have got the upgraded Adour engines which had been a bane for the Marut and could have made so many improvements and iterations of it.


How were we going to get any new engine? And which engines? This is a million dollar question no one seems to have answer for. It is one thing to lament about lost opportunities and this or that could/should've been done. But what was the ground reality? BRFites at time pull out pics of next series of fighters which HAL had proposed. Question is - when HAL could not manage to sort out issues with Marut, on what basis was it proposing next series of newer fighters? Where would've engines for them come from?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 25 Nov 2016 11:59

Rohit,

The follow on designs were designed around existing engines. And we lived with jaguars engines till 2/3rd of their lives. Didn't we?

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4681
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 25 Nov 2016 12:22

Indranil wrote:Paisa feko tamasha dekho. What is the technological challenge to double the width of the pipeline of the supply chain of LCA at every level? At most, it will cost double. Reallistically, much less.


As Shiv ji had mentioned in 'single engine thread' that certain parts iirc tail etc. are made of aviation alloys which a french company supplied, there orderbook is full for many years supplying to others also.... so maybe that could be the reason?

With single engine MII farce anyway only screwdrivergiri will be there so it won't be an issue.

MaverickV
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 23 Aug 2016 18:45

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby MaverickV » 25 Nov 2016 14:22

@rohitvats and tsarkar: the purpose of my post was not to blame X or Y. It never is 1 person or organization's decision which has stopped our MIL from developing to its potential. My post was more of a newbie's anguish when he sees an imported aircraft being upgraded thrice in its life with something developed indigenously while an indigenous product which could have used the fruits of our hard labor as well.
As for the engines, I know that the Marut engines were the under-powered Orpheus engines which were never upgraded. However, HAL came up with the idea of Marut Mk.2 with Adour engines. This would not only have commonality with the Jaguar engines but also saved the Marut fighters.
It was a lack of foresight on everyone's part to not do so. Something, that could have accelerated our aerospace capabilities by leaps and bounds.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2970
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby tsarkar » 25 Nov 2016 14:23

Indranil, Shiv,

Group Captain Kapil Bhargava has written extensively on Marut. His life and career was spent around it. His career ended prematurely too along with the Marut.

In early 80s, when avionics like INS and moving map displays for navigation and Laser Rangefinder and Marked Target Seeker (LRMTS) (refer chisel nose windows in Jaguar/ MiG-23BN/MiG-27M) became available, the Marut was found lacking space and electrical power to accommodate them. These avionics make mission success rate better and the life of a pilot much easier - and safer with low level flying.

What could the IAF have done for a fighter designed in 50s/60s that could've never foreseen INS, Moving Map Display & LRMTS being available in the 80s?

The Su-7 was also retired around the same time as Marut because of lack of upgrade potential.

Secondly, on the engine, the best option - paying RR to develop a higher thrust version of Orpheus was not exercised. Instead we tried co-development with Egypt as a part of Non Aligned Movement (a colossal waste of time, effort & money).

We indigenously developed a reheat Orpheus that disturbed the area ruling and hence did not give any benefit to Marut over its existing engine.

All options were exhausted.

With regards to Tejas - any aircraft entering production - will need refining to adapt it for production. SP-1 to 3 are not standardized, and we're not sure of the degree of standardization of remaining IOC aircraft, so they cannot deploy at forward bases where maintenance of uniquely built aircraft will be a pain.

Which is why production will gradually scale up to 16. Possibly when that has been achieved, then numbers can be ramped up to 20//24/30 or more.

Money wont solve the issue of standardization.

The Chinese do mass produce under-developed aircraft like F-7, but a quick study of Bangladesh & Sri Lankan Air Forces operating such aircraft will highlight their dismal maintainability. Second hand Israeli Kfir have better maintenance than Chinese F-7 in SLAF.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 25 Nov 2016 19:18

tsarkar wrote:Indranil, Shiv,

Group Captain Kapil Bhargava has written extensively on Marut. His life and career was spent around it. His career ended prematurely too along with the Marut.

In early 80s, when avionics like INS and moving map displays for navigation and Laser Rangefinder and Marked Target Seeker (LRMTS) (refer chisel nose windows in Jaguar/ MiG-23BN/MiG-27M) became available, the Marut was found lacking space and electrical power to accommodate them. These avionics make mission success rate better and the life of a pilot much easier - and safer with low level flying.

What could the IAF have done for a fighter designed in 50s/60s that could've never foreseen INS, Moving Map Display & LRMTS being available in the 80s?

Kapil Bhargava was a friend of mine via my cousin - I visited him at home several times and he was instrumental in setting me on a path that helped me write a program to diagnose abdominal pain - an algorithm that occurred to me when he was talking about constructing an expert system to arrive at possible causes of aviation accidents.

The problem is as follows and pardon me if I use an analogy. If the parents of Vijay are unable to read and assess their son's capability and constantly want him to do what his peer and classmate Rahul does next door - Vijay will constantly be hampered by expectations that do not fall within his skill set.

The IAF has never taken an active interest in the technological capabilities of the nation (Vijay's potential) but has always looked at current foreign developments (Rahul's achievements) as the benchmark. Hence we ask for "INS and moving map displays for navigation and Laser Rangefinder and Marked Target Seeker (LRMTS)". The navy always stuck to what could be achieved given its "smallest force" status. Perhaps the navy also was more acutely aware of the requirements of engineering because ships can't run without engineers while aircraft fly without them.

All our wars were won without any of that tech, and ultimately when push came to shove in 1999 the Jaguar that came with all that tech and the MiG 27 both proved useless and the maximum damage was done using dumb bombs and jugaad. Even the famous camp at Muntho Dalo that received a lot of love from the IAF was detected by mark 1 eyeball first.

This is not to say that tech is unnecessary but tech is a baby that needs to be nurtured, not an iPhone that should be bought and flaunted. One can give a thousand excuses of incompetence in every sphere of our nation and blame everyone else - but in my view nothing less than an active IAF role in nurturing domestic industry and creation of a good career path for IAF officers who do that is essential. A stint with industry should not be a punishment posting - but seen as an investment in the future.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Viv S » 25 Nov 2016 19:31

tsarkar wrote:What could the IAF have done for a fighter designed in 50s/60s that could've never foreseen INS, Moving Map Display & LRMTS being available in the 80s?

The Jaguar was designed in the 60s as well.

We indigenously developed a reheat Orpheus that disturbed the area ruling and hence did not give any benefit to Marut over its existing engine.

All options were exhausted.

We could have relinquished the interceptor role to the MiG-21 and introduced a Marut Mk2 with upgraded avionics for the DPSA role, instead of buying the Jaguar. Perhaps also using it for tactical strike i.e. as an alternative to the MiG-23BN/MiG-27.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Cosmo_R » 25 Nov 2016 20:44

Viv S wrote:
We could have relinquished the interceptor role to the MiG-21 and introduced a Marut Mk2 with upgraded avionics for the DPSA role, instead of buying the Jaguar. Perhaps also using it for tactical strike i.e. as an alternative to the MiG-23BN/MiG-27.


We could have and I believe people did try. The problem then as now, was the engine. The Orpheus was not enough and the Brits played games including not allowing the Adour (they wanted to sell the Jag). Even the famed 'Helwan' engine from the Egyptians was considered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helwan_HA-300

Until we get the engine tech by hook (DTTI) or by crook (Israelis) , we're not going to be free from foreign interference.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2330
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Vivek K » 25 Nov 2016 22:35

If you do not invest in a domestic Mil Ind complex, you will forever be dependent on foreign suppliers. With foreign suppliers, your warfightning capability can be effected as over several yearsas: a) your foreign policy alignments can change, b)your domestic compulsions (say vis a vis) Pakistan may require strike options that may not be supported by supplier nations etc.

Also with its weak financial position and low or almost no oil and gas reserves, India cannot afford in the long term to be wasting precious resources on purchases like the junk T-90/Armata or F-16/18 that are products of the cold war and have little or no future. A healthy Mil Ind complex can provide vast employment (see the case of China) and help conserve precious resources. If a LCA costs a third of the Rafale, and provides 3 times the employment, buying the LCA can help extensively with the economy and defence.

The IAF and Congress did the country a huge dis-service by not pursuing the complete development of the Marut. Imagine where India's aviation industry could have been had the Marut been kept in service with multiple upgrades.

But India remains corrupt and Indians continue to have disdain for domestic products. It is not for nothing that the East India Company was able to enslave a large nation India with relative ease. The challenge for Indians to unite, believe in themselves and march in step to the future remains. It will be interesting to see if they keep buying the tincans in thousands while rejecting the Arjun and buy the Rafale in 100s rejecting the LCA.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Viv S » 25 Nov 2016 22:37

Cosmo_R wrote:We could have and I believe people did try. The problem then as now, was the engine. The Orpheus was not enough and the Brits played games including not allowing the Adour (they wanted to sell the Jag). Even the famed 'Helwan' engine from the Egyptians was considered.

At low level, the Orpheus-powered HF-24 was outstanding. The Adour was needed for better thrust at altitude.

A variant of the Marut optimised for DPSA would have been perfectly adequate as an alternative to the Jaguar & MiG-27.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 26 Nov 2016 00:19

Tsarkar sir,

I can tell you with some level of certainty that increasing the space inside Marut for an INS (or similar device) was a smaller job that the twenty year search for the Jaguar. Today's Jaguars innards are very different from the 1980s Jaguars. Forget the jaguars, look at the F-16s of today and contrast them from 60 years ago. 30-40% of the avionics that the modern F-16 carries could have fit inside the F-16s of 1960s. And though F-16s exemplify and underscore the changes, it is common for almost all planes: F-15s, Migs. Afterall, the lifetime of a plane is 30-40 years, while that of its components is typically 10-15 years. Abandoning a plane for a component or two shows lack of will and nothing else.

P.S. I have read Gp. Capt. Kapil Bhargava's writings and respect him greatly.

Anyways, let us let bygones be by gones. Hopefully, we have learnt our lesson and won't repeat it in another single engined aircraft in stead of more LCAs. Meanwhile, Ajai Shukla is the only man who has got us the picture from the real event. Kudos.
Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19582
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Karan M » 26 Nov 2016 00:39

That pitot tube suggests 2032 not 2052? Most AESA equipped fighters seem to drop it...

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 645
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Y I Patel » 26 Nov 2016 03:31

Regarding the Marut - it entered service in 1967, when a one or even two front war was a possibility at any time. In fact, there was a skirmish with China that very year... and also remember that Marut was supposed to be a supersonic interceptor going up against Starfighters. It did not have the engine to do so, but in spite of that, IAF did find a useful role for it as a low-level strike fighter. When the situation improved in '70s, attempts to improve its capabilities continued, and Maruts continued to see active frontline service. Ultimately, by early '80s,it was clear that PAF would be F-16s. So IAF needed a counter ASAP against one of the most fearsome fighters of that generation, and an upgraded version of Marut just would not fit the bill.

As for continuing as a strike fighter, correct me if I am wrong but I belive the Jaguars have a significantly greater range than the Maruts. And the Mig23s/27s a much better 'turn and burn' capability. So the Marut may have been adequate but might not have been the ideal solution even for that role.

That might not have been the only consideration, but certainly a significant one for finally terminating the program.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2330
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Vivek K » 26 Nov 2016 05:27

That does not excuse the IAF for throwing away the Marut entirely!! It's advantages should have been exploited further. After all the Jags took 20 years! 20 years invested in the Maruts would have led to something!

We just don't have the makeup to give local products a chance! The Arjun's are a poster child for that.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 26 Nov 2016 06:36

Y I Patel wrote:Regarding the Marut - it entered service in 1967, when a one or even two front war was a possibility at any time. In fact, there was a skirmish with China that very year... and also remember that Marut was supposed to be a supersonic interceptor going up against Starfighters. It did not have the engine to do so, but in spite of that, IAF did find a useful role for it as a low-level strike fighter. When the situation improved in '70s, attempts to improve its capabilities continued, and Maruts continued to see active frontline service. Ultimately, by early '80s,it was clear that PAF would be F-16s. So IAF needed a counter ASAP against one of the most fearsome fighters of that generation, and an upgraded version of Marut just would not fit the bill.

As for continuing as a strike fighter, correct me if I am wrong but I belive the Jaguars have a significantly greater range than the Maruts. And the Mig23s/27s a much better 'turn and burn' capability. So the Marut may have been adequate but might not have been the ideal solution even for that role.

That might not have been the only consideration, but certainly a significant one for finally terminating the program.

A few errors in the above account. the Marut was developed in the late 1950s as a "fighter-bomber" - i.e what we call today as "Multi-role fighter". Ground attack was part of its job description from Day 1. The Starfighter was designed only as a high altitude interceptor to target high altitude Soviet bombers - so from day 1 Marut has good low level performance despite low power while the Starfighter, despite its power would never manage that role.

That aside the Starfighter was provided to Pakistan in 1961, after the first Marut had flown. India purchased the MiG 21 to counter the Starfighter. The inability of Marut to match the Starfighter should never be used as an excuse to explain why the Marut was discarded.

The Jaguar was conceived in the early 60s and happened to fit into a role that the IAF called "Deep Penetration" (into Pakistan onlee). If we wanted deep penetration into China we should have bought Tu 16 or B-52. The Jaguar replaced the Canberra, not the Marut

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby svinayak » 26 Nov 2016 07:02

Indranil wrote: . Abandoning a plane for a component or two shows lack of will and nothing else.

Abandoning a plane for a component is a political decision.
Indian political system was used to keep India behind since India was producing tech talent even in 1960s.
Indian talent was seen as a threat in 60s during the rising middle class in the west

But the result of 20 years of lack of investment made India lag behind in tech and tech eco system and growth

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8172
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 26 Nov 2016 07:25

As I said before, it is very easy to blame it all on politics and the slimy politician. I am not blaming the IAF. But let's say IAF had stuck to its guns that they will make the Marut work, which politician would have said, "No, go for a Jaguar". By the way, how the Jaguars came into the Indian stables makes for some fascinating reading. Also, I would like to draw the attention of readers as to why the DARIN systems were proposed and how that (an Indian designed system) far outdid the original systems the Jaguars came with.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest