Aditya why do you keep on harping on air combat. Attacking the enemy on the ground at the border and just beyond the border are roles that take up at least 50% of the air force's attention and the combat Hawk will be for that role. Top cover when necessary will be by some other aircraft. Did you see Air Cmde Tikoo Sen's (BRF handle Abhibhushan) vision of a future aircraft that I posted earlier? Whenever we discuss combat on this forum all we seem to talk about is air combat. Why? It is the ground attack role that is just as important in war. Air combat capability is to facilitate that ground attack role as far as possible.Aditya G wrote:I think Combat Hawk may have some potential in IAF if it is developed as an upgrade package, and not a new plane. IAF may find that the upgrades improve the quality and content of the training delivered to student pilots - in which case it will be a win win. It will also allow IAF to use student pilots to deliver a small range of combat missions, such as flying CAPs over own airbases like Agra and Gwalior.
However, we should not entertain the notion that Hawk can supplement the squadron shortfall. When the balloon goes up, IAF will throw all hawks into the battle and we will end up loosing a lot of good men.
In war, IAF's #1 priority will be to ensure air defence over own territory and over own troops. Hawk will be found wanting in that role as it will not have the speed to intercept Paki fighters. Even if an intercept is made, can Hawk defeat even a F-7PG with eye-ball mark-2 alone? Even an old MiG-21FL is preferred in such circumstances.
During peacetime, I doubt Hawks can intercept a high flying airliner. For UAV interception, LCH or Apaches may be better suited.
Nevertheless, I am wonder how Hawk compares to Hawker Hunter in performance. If all things remain same as in 1965, could Hawks attack Sargodha?
Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
-
Shreeman
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3762
- Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
- Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
- Contact:
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
^^ This post had potential, it was a great idea for its time.
But its late. The requirements for this post were set down in 1983. It still doesnt meet the GSQR setdown for superb posts and it is at least one generation behind the quality of superb posts from the west. There is no upgrade potential. There is no mass apeal. There are no catchy phrases. The sentences and paragraphs do not meet the approved quality of text separation.
During the writing of this post, the writer had help. Basically repeating many of the points already made in previous post. Still in the reinvention of the wheel, there was not even one picture included to improve reader attraction. The post did not even invent a new acronym.
The writer also failed to conduct focus group in the summer and winter, and at high altotude and sea level. There is no data from any focus groups. Not even a single reference cited. Where is the data supporting comparative reader performance with the latest chinese stealth posts?
I mean dont get me wrong, it was a good idea for its time. But its clearly just a three legged post. One cal even call it a late arriving composite post (LaCP).
edit -- see, new posts arrived in the middle even for this editorial. Technology is fast moving. Ae cant be just mass adopting last generation posts!
But its late. The requirements for this post were set down in 1983. It still doesnt meet the GSQR setdown for superb posts and it is at least one generation behind the quality of superb posts from the west. There is no upgrade potential. There is no mass apeal. There are no catchy phrases. The sentences and paragraphs do not meet the approved quality of text separation.
During the writing of this post, the writer had help. Basically repeating many of the points already made in previous post. Still in the reinvention of the wheel, there was not even one picture included to improve reader attraction. The post did not even invent a new acronym.
The writer also failed to conduct focus group in the summer and winter, and at high altotude and sea level. There is no data from any focus groups. Not even a single reference cited. Where is the data supporting comparative reader performance with the latest chinese stealth posts?
I mean dont get me wrong, it was a good idea for its time. But its clearly just a three legged post. One cal even call it a late arriving composite post (LaCP).
edit -- see, new posts arrived in the middle even for this editorial. Technology is fast moving. Ae cant be just mass adopting last generation posts!
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
If I was asked to make a general, off the cuff remark about the Russian Air Force's performance in Syria - I would say that it is the ground attack with 1980 vintage designs that have changed the course of the war. Russia's score in air combat is -1. They lost. To Turkey. But in the long term it is the ground war that makes a difference - er..on the ground
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
and for that ground war (CAS), a Mig 27 still is a better plane than either hawk or LCA. It can take heavy punishment and fly back home. Hawk will be sitting duck, LCA with it's composite body not so great.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
anything will work with no SAMs in play and visually guided zsu/dhsk as only AA threat.
the Tejas has far better climb rate, avionics and self protection suite than Mig27 and will have far better serviceability in squadron service. it only lacks the trump card of the Mig27 which is the big snarling cannon. it can also fire AAM and defend itself against lurking airborne threats.
we have to be realistic, the TSPA/PLA is a far more potent threat than ISIS/FSA/JN.
only if we get someone of that nature to fight with do 500 new Mig27 make sense.
the Tejas has far better climb rate, avionics and self protection suite than Mig27 and will have far better serviceability in squadron service. it only lacks the trump card of the Mig27 which is the big snarling cannon. it can also fire AAM and defend itself against lurking airborne threats.
we have to be realistic, the TSPA/PLA is a far more potent threat than ISIS/FSA/JN.
only if we get someone of that nature to fight with do 500 new Mig27 make sense.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
I believe that one of the mistakes made is to assume that every scene of action in a war will be thick with air defence fighters, SAMs and Manpads. It is safe to assume that they may be but ultimately no nation can fight any war if their side is afraid of getting hit and refuses to get into a fight because of that fear.
Let me leave out PLAAF for now but look at the combat aircraft that the PAF has (types and numbers). How many of them can be used for air defence? How many targets can they defend for 24 hours a day because Indian attacks will come 24 hours a day
Then look at a broad 500 km long battlefront from Kashmir to Rajasthan. Assume that the IAF has 500 targets to hit along that battlefront and these targets are trains, bridges, troop concentrations, airfields, radar sites, water and fuel dumps etc. If the IAF mounts 750 sorties on the first day how many of those targets will be thick with SAMs, MANPADs and top cover?
Typically the air force plans for some attrition. there will be losses. But in war the idea is to achieve air dominance as soon as possible - accepting even 10% losses in the first week or two. In this kind of war - lightly defended targets will even have An-32 bombing them. We also have Brahmos and Prithvi that will be applied where needed.
Going by air combat potential alone we should not have any attack helicopters at all.
Let me leave out PLAAF for now but look at the combat aircraft that the PAF has (types and numbers). How many of them can be used for air defence? How many targets can they defend for 24 hours a day because Indian attacks will come 24 hours a day
Then look at a broad 500 km long battlefront from Kashmir to Rajasthan. Assume that the IAF has 500 targets to hit along that battlefront and these targets are trains, bridges, troop concentrations, airfields, radar sites, water and fuel dumps etc. If the IAF mounts 750 sorties on the first day how many of those targets will be thick with SAMs, MANPADs and top cover?
Typically the air force plans for some attrition. there will be losses. But in war the idea is to achieve air dominance as soon as possible - accepting even 10% losses in the first week or two. In this kind of war - lightly defended targets will even have An-32 bombing them. We also have Brahmos and Prithvi that will be applied where needed.
Going by air combat potential alone we should not have any attack helicopters at all.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Few thoughts:
I dont think the CAS derivatives of the trainers (Hawk or HTT-40) are for Day1 of war. As Shiv is pointing out, A-to-A is not the issue, after the air-dominance part of war. But A-to-G is a big deal for the rest of the war. Same as MQ series drones are not used by khan for Day#1.
Despite all the hype about shock and awe, most wars in the hills will be long drawn out, lasting for weeks. The side that has got the maximum crafts still in the air, has lots of flexibility over the side that has lots of roads infra. The war in Tibet has to be fought in the air for the most part and let the Tibetans deal with the ground
Same as we cant be assured of no-fly zone kind of dominance that khan demands off tinpot airspaces, we cant claim we will be able to securely control all the armed UAVs in a chaotic EC-rich environment. khan dominates the electromagnetic spectrum in a decisive way, unlike India around its neighbourhood. Still the UAVs get into control issues. A man in the cockpit of a CAS craft is good in that sense, for making choices.
SAMs et al seem to strike mortal fear among the posters here, thanks to the Kargil shootdowns. Way more than the more prolific ATGMs to tank crews. But as is proven by the Syrian garbage-can counter measures, these missile seekers can and will be spoofed out, their advantages lessened. And these SAMs are expensive, particularly the upper tier ones. They are not easy to move around in the mountains. And manpads are not that easy to resupply and restock over the hills. IIRC, in Kargil, they fired a few 10s of MANPADs, before a craft came down. So self-protection tactics and tech can be figured out
(edit: Shiv has touched on SAM, while I was typing
)
I dont think the CAS derivatives of the trainers (Hawk or HTT-40) are for Day1 of war. As Shiv is pointing out, A-to-A is not the issue, after the air-dominance part of war. But A-to-G is a big deal for the rest of the war. Same as MQ series drones are not used by khan for Day#1.
Despite all the hype about shock and awe, most wars in the hills will be long drawn out, lasting for weeks. The side that has got the maximum crafts still in the air, has lots of flexibility over the side that has lots of roads infra. The war in Tibet has to be fought in the air for the most part and let the Tibetans deal with the ground
Same as we cant be assured of no-fly zone kind of dominance that khan demands off tinpot airspaces, we cant claim we will be able to securely control all the armed UAVs in a chaotic EC-rich environment. khan dominates the electromagnetic spectrum in a decisive way, unlike India around its neighbourhood. Still the UAVs get into control issues. A man in the cockpit of a CAS craft is good in that sense, for making choices.
SAMs et al seem to strike mortal fear among the posters here, thanks to the Kargil shootdowns. Way more than the more prolific ATGMs to tank crews. But as is proven by the Syrian garbage-can counter measures, these missile seekers can and will be spoofed out, their advantages lessened. And these SAMs are expensive, particularly the upper tier ones. They are not easy to move around in the mountains. And manpads are not that easy to resupply and restock over the hills. IIRC, in Kargil, they fired a few 10s of MANPADs, before a craft came down. So self-protection tactics and tech can be figured out
(edit: Shiv has touched on SAM, while I was typing
)Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
In my opinion these are assumptions. Do you have data of how much punishment MiG 27s can take? Or whether composites behave like made in China plastic.? LCH and Apaches will also be sitting ducks.fanne wrote:and for that ground war (CAS), a Mig 27 still is a better plane than either hawk or LCA. It can take heavy punishment and fly back home. Hawk will be sitting duck, LCA with it's composite body not so great.
I don't mean to say this in a mocking sense but much of the "war plans" that I see on BRF remind me more of France's defensive Maginot line than a study of what has actually happened in wars.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
That said, my only concern is if that armed proposal for HTT40 gets shorted out by this "hey, we already have Hawks, let us arm it"
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Putting it very crudely:
Role of air force in war
1. Defence of Indian airspace and ground assets in India (cities, air bases, army camps, radar sites etc)
2. Attacking those same targets across the border in enemy territory
3. Troop support which involves some degree of attacking supply lines across the border
The air force will have to divide up its assets for these three roles. Having multirole aircraft (MiG 21, Tejas, Su 30, Mirage) will assists in allowing any of these roles to be played by any available aircraft. Planes like MiG 27, Jaguar and combat hawk will be for attack alone - that is points 2 & 3 above
The attack aircraft will be expected to the maximum damage to hurt the enemy - by paralysing airfields and radar sites and C&C centers. Those sites are also the best defended so the attack aircraft will need escort of Su 30, MiG 21 or Tejas
Sites just across the border that hurt enemy attack capability like bridges and railway stations and fuel dumps are less likely to be heavily defended. The idea will be to take them out stealthily in a very low level (50 feet) ingress and a single pass attack. Enter at low level and drop deliver munitions accurately on well mapped/reconnoitred sites. One pass attacks have the least chance of getting hit by ground fire. Making second or third passes will put planes and pilots at greater risk. For this we need accurate information, mapping and marking of targets and good PGMs
Role of air force in war
1. Defence of Indian airspace and ground assets in India (cities, air bases, army camps, radar sites etc)
2. Attacking those same targets across the border in enemy territory
3. Troop support which involves some degree of attacking supply lines across the border
The air force will have to divide up its assets for these three roles. Having multirole aircraft (MiG 21, Tejas, Su 30, Mirage) will assists in allowing any of these roles to be played by any available aircraft. Planes like MiG 27, Jaguar and combat hawk will be for attack alone - that is points 2 & 3 above
The attack aircraft will be expected to the maximum damage to hurt the enemy - by paralysing airfields and radar sites and C&C centers. Those sites are also the best defended so the attack aircraft will need escort of Su 30, MiG 21 or Tejas
Sites just across the border that hurt enemy attack capability like bridges and railway stations and fuel dumps are less likely to be heavily defended. The idea will be to take them out stealthily in a very low level (50 feet) ingress and a single pass attack. Enter at low level and drop deliver munitions accurately on well mapped/reconnoitred sites. One pass attacks have the least chance of getting hit by ground fire. Making second or third passes will put planes and pilots at greater risk. For this we need accurate information, mapping and marking of targets and good PGMs
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Shiv, there is a fourth, neo-lawenforcement aspect. After the first few days, the countrysides and highways of Pakjab needs to be kept sanitized by ground troops. But the cities need to be patrolled with minimal boots in the ground, due to insurgent style counter attacks. Such lower-tier crafts can do good and strike fear of the law as laid down by Indian martial administrators
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
^^ Shivji, CAS is important, no doubt about that - and more so, in say <100Km radius of a open-combat zone, in Indian context.
However, I'm not clear, in the "modern" battlefield scenario, in the <100Km-radius CAS situations (let's call it short-range-CAS), what is it that combat-Hawk can do that a LCH couldn't? And more important, which one of it, would be have more survival chance/probability?
And to make it more "specific" in the day-3 or day-4 war scenario with no surviving SAM cover, how much bigger is the MANPAD threat to a LCH than a combat Hawk (in <10-12K ft altitude in such short-range-CAS type operating env)?
Short answer is, I don't know - but maybe deejay, abhibhushanji, tsarkarji et all would, so pls weigh in!!
However, I'm not clear, in the "modern" battlefield scenario, in the <100Km-radius CAS situations (let's call it short-range-CAS), what is it that combat-Hawk can do that a LCH couldn't? And more important, which one of it, would be have more survival chance/probability?
And to make it more "specific" in the day-3 or day-4 war scenario with no surviving SAM cover, how much bigger is the MANPAD threat to a LCH than a combat Hawk (in <10-12K ft altitude in such short-range-CAS type operating env)?
Short answer is, I don't know - but maybe deejay, abhibhushanji, tsarkarji et all would, so pls weigh in!!
-
Shreeman
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3762
- Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
- Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
- Contact:
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
mailtya,
everything has a role.
lch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Light ... Helicopter 145knots, 1 ton, ceiling? radar?
hawk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Hawk 400+knots 3 ton celining? radar?
A10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A10_warthog 300knots, 7 ton ceiling? radar?
these are different roles. there will be different operators. the lchs will likely be with armor underneath. the cas fixed wing wander in/out. army aviation gets lch, doesnt get fixed wing. the whole philosophy of using one or the other is different. there is nothing really apples vs apples here. the lch will never do a dumb bomb release in anger in all likelihood. cas or not.
everything has a role.
lch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Light ... Helicopter 145knots, 1 ton, ceiling? radar?
hawk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Hawk 400+knots 3 ton celining? radar?
A10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A10_warthog 300knots, 7 ton ceiling? radar?
these are different roles. there will be different operators. the lchs will likely be with armor underneath. the cas fixed wing wander in/out. army aviation gets lch, doesnt get fixed wing. the whole philosophy of using one or the other is different. there is nothing really apples vs apples here. the lch will never do a dumb bomb release in anger in all likelihood. cas or not.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
The real heavyweight helos that the IAF needs.
X-posted from the Ru mil td.
X-posted from the Ru mil td.
Quote:
Having taken delivery of six Mil Mi-26T2 helicopters in 2015-16, Algeria has firmed up an option for eight more, for delivery in 2017-18. The North African country was effectively the launch customer for the upgraded version of the heavy-lift machine. Russian arms vendor Rosoboronexport was the intermediary between the customer, the Russian Helicopters holding company, and its subsidiary Rostvertol, which produces the Mi-26. It is the world’s largest rotorcraft in serial production.
As of today, the T2 version is operational only in Algeria. The Russian defense ministry has declared an intent to buy some but has yet to formalize a purchase agreement. China took an additional Mi-26T last year and is considering the T2. The Mi-26T2 is the most recent version of the baseline Mi-26. It has a maximum takeoff weight of 56 metric tons (123,500 pounds) and a maximum payload of 20 tons (44,000 pounds). With a full payload, the helicopter can cover nearly 600 km (320 nm) at a cruise speed of 255 km/h (138 knots). The Mi-26T2 is distinguishable though a state-of-the-art BREO-26 cockpit package from Russian avionics group KRET. It features a glass cockpit of five LCDs, digital data processing, satellite-aided navigation, night flying capability, secure datalink and built-in health-monitoring system. Aircrew is reduced to two to three from five or six for the baseline version.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 00957.html
IAF has lowest combat power in decade- With only 32 squadrons, Indian Air Force is now in the ‘middle of shortage’
IAF has lowest combat power in decade- With only 32 squadrons, Indian Air Force is now in the ‘middle of shortage’
In a damning reality, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is now at its lowest combat strength in more than a decade.
The IAF has informed the government about the gravity of the situation that the force is now in the middle of the shortage. Three squadrons of the vintage single-engine Soviet Union origin MiG-21 and MiG-27 have been phased out as on January 1 this year, leaving the IAF with only 32 squadrons (some 16-18 planes in each). This is some 10 short of the government mandated 42 squadrons needed to tackle a simultaneous two-front war with China and Pakistan.
In simple words, the IAF will have some 576 fighter jets and will be short of the 750-strong fighter jet fleet mandated by a government sanction to wage a simultaneous two-front war with Pakistan and China.
Of the 32 squadrons, the vintage MiG-21 and MiG-27 will form 11 squadrons. The Sukhoi 30-MKI populates 10 squadron, the 1970’s design British Jaguar is in six squadrons, followed by French Mirage 2000 and Soviet Union’s MiG-29 in two and three squadrons, respectively. The last three are being upgraded with better missiles and avionics.
The country is now facing the reality of projections on IAF fighter fleet made, separately, over the past 10 years, by the Indian Air Force, strategic thinkers, successive reports of Parliamentary Committees on Defence and the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). Warnings on the “lackadaisical” pace of induction of new fighter jets into the Indian Air Force and the resultant lose of “combative edge” in battle are now ringing true, sources say.
A senior official admitted: “We are in the middle of the predicted shortage.”
It is the replacements which bother the IAF. The IAF will be raising a squadron of the twin-engine Russian-origin Sukhoi-30-MKI within this year but much depends on the speed of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), which is licensed to produce it in India.
HAL, a Ministry of Defence (MoD)-owned public sector undertaking, was mandated by the Cabinet Committee on Security in March 2006 to produce 16 planes annually and deliver 180 in phases by 2017. The project is running three years behind schedule. Till 2011, the HAL had the capacity to produce just eight Sukhoi-30 jets annually, said a report of the CAG in 2014.
The Sukhois were ordered in phases since 1997, the IAF wants 272 of these in its fleet by 2020. The other choice for the IAF is to seek faster induction of the 106 Tejas “Mark-1A” which have been ordered.
The MoD has set a 2018 deadline for the first aircraft to be ready with a target to complete its production by 2022-23. In September, new specifications were agreed upon and the IAF accepted 43 modifications that could be carried out without changing the existing design.
10 squadrons short for two-front war with China, Pak
•Three squadrons of the vintage single-engine Soviet Union origin MiG-21 and MiG-27 have been phased out on January 1, leaving the IAF with only 32 squadrons (some 16-18 planes in each)
•This is 10 short of the mandated 42 squadrons needed to tackle a simultaneous war with China and Pakistan
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
A truely scorched earth policy, a very weak defense and and very weak Economy. While Pakis made good plans in the 2004-14 period with numerous F-16's getting JF-17 from China what did we do, just continue Su-30 orders and that too with very poor inventories of spare parts and the MMRCA fiasco. Quite frankly all we can do today is fight a defensive battle with Even Pakistan.
When GF As DM left he thought of LCA, ordering 125 M-2000-5 in Interim with SU-30 production of 150 aircraft. Then LCA programme was sabotaged with IAF made to say it will accept only all NEW MK2 LCA, M-2000-5 order converted to MMRCA fiasco, SU-30 given piecemeal orders, a limited long drawn out M-2000 and Mig-29 upgrade. AEW just given 2 aircrafts, No Phalcon orders. What did the Saint & Co do for 10 years?? The only positive was the Akash orders. While C-17 are good aircraft, c-130 were also, did 8 Billion for these over priority given for dwindling Fighter numbers?
We were setting ourselves for anther 1962.
It will take at-least 10 years for us to get the AEW, UCAV, SAM's, Radars, Fighter aircraft etc ready for Pakis to have enough respect for us not to get trigger happy. Till then they will taunt us.
When GF As DM left he thought of LCA, ordering 125 M-2000-5 in Interim with SU-30 production of 150 aircraft. Then LCA programme was sabotaged with IAF made to say it will accept only all NEW MK2 LCA, M-2000-5 order converted to MMRCA fiasco, SU-30 given piecemeal orders, a limited long drawn out M-2000 and Mig-29 upgrade. AEW just given 2 aircrafts, No Phalcon orders. What did the Saint & Co do for 10 years?? The only positive was the Akash orders. While C-17 are good aircraft, c-130 were also, did 8 Billion for these over priority given for dwindling Fighter numbers?
We were setting ourselves for anther 1962.
It will take at-least 10 years for us to get the AEW, UCAV, SAM's, Radars, Fighter aircraft etc ready for Pakis to have enough respect for us not to get trigger happy. Till then they will taunt us.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
India’s home grown basic trainer aircraft HTT 40 set for first flight by end of March
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 130539.cms
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 130539.cms
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
IAF should have purchased the Qatari Mirages and also increased its Mig-29 fleet. This option should still be looked into. Additional MKIs are also a good option that is already being discussed. In addition, HAL needs to get cracking in delivering LCAs.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
And therein lies the tragedy of it allA senior official admitted: “We are in the middle of the predicted shortage.”
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
While I believe Hawk and LCH can both provide CAS nearly interchangeably in some situations - there are some differences - at least as far as my knowledge goes.maitya wrote: However, I'm not clear, in the "modern" battlefield scenario, in the <100Km-radius CAS situations (let's call it short-range-CAS), what is it that combat-Hawk can do that a LCH couldn't? And more important, which one of it, would be have more survival chance/probability?
And to make it more "specific" in the day-3 or day-4 war scenario with no surviving SAM cover, how much bigger is the MANPAD threat to a LCH than a combat Hawk (in <10-12K ft altitude in such short-range-CAS type operating env)?
Helos are better capable of loitering about and giving close support in the battlefield. While manpads are a threat - helos can minimize their exposure by using nap of earth and terrain features and may be in a better position to identify problem spots like a machine-gun emplacement or mortar that are troubling troops. Jets pilots, flying much faster will be presented with only a blur as they fly low and if they overshoot and fail to identify a target they will be miles away in a few seconds, having to navigate back. But their speed also makes them somewhat less susceptible to ground fire. Manpad or AA gun teams need at least 3-4 seconds to get a bead on the aircraft, slew the weapon in the right direction and shoot. The time may vary depending on training and anxiety in a battle zone. Jets at low level will be far away in that time. Anyone who has spent time watching out for aircraft will know that low, fast flying aircraft will appear on the horizon and vanish in seconds and by the time he passes overhead he may already have dropped some munition that is on its way to the observer. Also when it comes to flying deeper into enemy territory to take out convoys of tanks and ammunition jets can get there and back quicker
Perhaps the biggest deciding factor will be availability - which one is available to do the job. Having both Hawks and Helos increases the number aircraft available for the job.
That said - has anyone considered the increase in size of the Naval air arm as taking pressure off the IAF. This is not to say that the IAF does not need aircraft in numbers but just sayin..
Also - remember that for targets within 200 km from the border an attack using Prithvi or Brhamos will not only cause damage but confusion because no one will be able to say that it was not an air raid. Enemy air defences may be diverted to an area that was attacked by missiles. leaving other areas undefended. Also, within 50 km targets can be pummelled by MBRLs. War must always be fought in cooperation between the 3 services. It's not Air Force alone fighting its own war - although it is alleged that the Indian army has done that in the past on occasion.
The Pakistani army and air force are known to have fought their own separate wars with little information exchange and cooperation
-
member_29350
- BRFite
- Posts: 119
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
So much for planning and doing a multiyear exercise to choose an aircraft.Manish_P wrote:And therein lies the tragedy of it allA senior official admitted: “We are in the middle of the predicted shortage.”
"There is no plan B" comes back to bite us now.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Who told you that of a MiG-27??? It ain't no Su-25 or A-10.fanne wrote:and for that ground war (CAS), a Mig 27 still is a better plane than either hawk or LCA. It can take heavy punishment and fly back home. Hawk will be sitting duck, LCA with it's composite body not so great.
A while ago one of the posters mentioned that MiG-27 had armor and I had questioned him on the extent of armor that was on it. Apart from that bolt of side-cockpit armor there was no mention of armor anywhere else. There was a mention of MiG-23BN that had some heavy aluminum plating under its engine but that was about it. So your point of "it [MiG-27] can take heavy punishment and fly back home" is not quite true.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
IIRC, the Qatari and UAE wanted a very high price for the planes. Plus they would need a NOC from France which they are unlikely to give unless they are accommodated by India.Vivek K wrote:IAF should have purchased the Qatari Mirages and also increased its Mig-29 fleet. This option should still be looked into. Additional MKIs are also a good option that is already being discussed. In addition, HAL needs to get cracking in delivering LCAs.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Shiv,
>>I believe that one of the mistakes made is to assume that every scene of action in a war will be thick with air defence fighters, SAMs and Manpads. It is safe to assume that they may be but ultimately no nation can fight any war if their side is afraid of getting hit and refuses to get into a fight because of that fear.
Disagree.
The Vampires in 1965.
Besides which we are not exactly overflowing with fighter pilots.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 894363.cms
The Hawk is too slow to outrun or outfight fighters, doesn't carry the defensive avionics without which IAF wouldn't even accept the LCA, cannot defend itself in BVR or WVR and comes in at the same price as a LCA and is only marginally cheaper if anything.
Pakistan Army is overflowing with MANPADS. SIPRI IIRC showed significant numbers.
So what's so great about the Hawk?
Looks like yet another half baked idea from HAL to prove its "independence" while disassociating from LCA and other critical programs.
Only plus of Hawk is its endurance, but for that effort focus on UAVs and newer variants of the LCA.
>>I believe that one of the mistakes made is to assume that every scene of action in a war will be thick with air defence fighters, SAMs and Manpads. It is safe to assume that they may be but ultimately no nation can fight any war if their side is afraid of getting hit and refuses to get into a fight because of that fear.
Disagree.
The Vampires in 1965.
Besides which we are not exactly overflowing with fighter pilots.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 894363.cms
The Hawk is too slow to outrun or outfight fighters, doesn't carry the defensive avionics without which IAF wouldn't even accept the LCA, cannot defend itself in BVR or WVR and comes in at the same price as a LCA and is only marginally cheaper if anything.
Pakistan Army is overflowing with MANPADS. SIPRI IIRC showed significant numbers.
So what's so great about the Hawk?
Looks like yet another half baked idea from HAL to prove its "independence" while disassociating from LCA and other critical programs.
Only plus of Hawk is its endurance, but for that effort focus on UAVs and newer variants of the LCA.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
The Cmdr Sen made the assumption that the target area will be low on manpads and hilly, which I assumed meant the China front.
BTW, the US has been very reluctant to send A-10s into the ISIS infested areas. Nothing official about why not, but very few sorties for a plane designed for CAS.
With the advent of precision munitions it would be difficult to recommend a plane.
BTW, the US has been very reluctant to send A-10s into the ISIS infested areas. Nothing official about why not, but very few sorties for a plane designed for CAS.
With the advent of precision munitions it would be difficult to recommend a plane.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Pakistan is MANPADs heavy, also fields Crotale/RBS-70/SPADA-2000.
China is MANPADS, SAM heavy - of all classes.
Combat hawk without significant defensive aids = bad idea.
China is MANPADS, SAM heavy - of all classes.
Combat hawk without significant defensive aids = bad idea.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
It is here and will be made here in numbers, freeing up other aircraft for roles that they are capable of performing. I predict that it will be single seat, have a better range and payload, come with self protection systems and carry 2 SRAAMs. It will also perform better at high altitude than the Jaguar. It is technology that we have absorbed more or less and still has some scope for upgradation, unlike Bison that has reached the very end.Karan M wrote:
So what's so great about the Hawk?
Need to wait for details - maybe Aero India 2017
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
The Combat Hawk is a solid idea as long as they limit the project to just to an upgrade of the IAF's birds. It'll allow the Hawk squadrons (esp. the core of instructor pilots) to contribute in at least some manner in wartime.
Any resources (incl. manpower & real estate) beyond that are better invested in expanding the Tejas' production; costs roughly 50% more flyaway, performance is in a different league and has far far better export potential.
Any resources (incl. manpower & real estate) beyond that are better invested in expanding the Tejas' production; costs roughly 50% more flyaway, performance is in a different league and has far far better export potential.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Simply put, why not buy more LCAs? You have Hawks at $22 Mn and LCAs at $@25Mn. Even if LCAs were $30Mn, they will be far more potent than any Hawk will ever be. The performance envelope of the two is not even in the same class and the LCA is better for India to be made in numbers than an imported CKD/SKD Hawk.shiv wrote:/quote]
It is here and will be made here in numbers, freeing up other aircraft for roles that they are capable of performing.
I predict that it will be single seat, have a better range and payload, come with self protection systems and carry 2 SRAAMs. It will also perform better at high altitude than the Jaguar. It is technology that we have absorbed more or less and still has some scope for upgradation, unlike Bison that has reached the very end.
Need to wait for details - maybe Aero India 2017
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
LCA has 7 pylons and can carry 4 weapons apart from 3 fuel tanks (for max endurance) + Litening.
If two of the pylons are SRAAM+BVRAAM (Derby and Python-V are very similar weight wise), that still translates to two LGBs.
Hawk may have more endurance but will have no BVR option and cannot even rely on speed (supersonic dash) to escape interceptors.
Defense suite - LCA has EW jammer planned. Hawk, no mention.
HAL should be told to focus on more high priority programs like the LCA than chasing after quixotic license production deals.
If two of the pylons are SRAAM+BVRAAM (Derby and Python-V are very similar weight wise), that still translates to two LGBs.
Hawk may have more endurance but will have no BVR option and cannot even rely on speed (supersonic dash) to escape interceptors.
Defense suite - LCA has EW jammer planned. Hawk, no mention.
HAL should be told to focus on more high priority programs like the LCA than chasing after quixotic license production deals.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Additional Hawks could be given to BSF, for balloon interception role, once LCA are operational and in numbers. LCA to Hawk is like Su-30MKI to Tejas.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Monitoring airspace at the border is the IAF's job, not the BSF's. And since all these purchases are funded by the exchequer not by the individual services, that money would still be more productively utilized if it were spent on the Tejas (even in the unlikely event of their being transferred to the BSF).vishvak wrote:Additional Hawks could be given to BSF, for balloon interception role, once LCA are operational and in numbers. LCA to Hawk is like Su-30MKI to Tejas.
Compared to the Tejas, the Su-30MKI has a longer range, greater payload and more powerful radar. However, in purely technological terms it is not superior to the Tejas, unlike the Tejas and the Hawk.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Karan,
I agree with you on some aspects. Clearly HAL is trying to make easy money from a well established line now. But, I am not really convinced of its role in the IAF. I will explain later. However, I disagree with you on the costs vis-a-vis LCA. While a combat-Hawk and an LCA may have similar acquisition costs, operating a frontline fighter like LCA is expected to be much higher. I would not be surprised it is 50 to 100% higher.
What Abhibhushan sir is asking is a clear and present need. Roles where LCA is too much of an aircraft, and an armed HTT-40 is too less. In other words, something on the lines of a A-1/A-11 Ghibli. A closer example is how the Finns use their Hawks: gunpods, Russian "R-60 (AA-8)" AAMs, and Vinten optical-infrared camera pods. Or how UAE used their Hawks: Vinten camera-pods, and Matra Magics AAMs. The Kuwaitis used AIM-9L Sidewinders.
My question is can an armed Hawk do the job in the Indian scenario? Surely, they can't take off with any meaningful payloads from the J&K/Ladakh regions. Along the eastern borders, it may be more useful, but I am not totally convinced.
I agree with you on some aspects. Clearly HAL is trying to make easy money from a well established line now. But, I am not really convinced of its role in the IAF. I will explain later. However, I disagree with you on the costs vis-a-vis LCA. While a combat-Hawk and an LCA may have similar acquisition costs, operating a frontline fighter like LCA is expected to be much higher. I would not be surprised it is 50 to 100% higher.
What Abhibhushan sir is asking is a clear and present need. Roles where LCA is too much of an aircraft, and an armed HTT-40 is too less. In other words, something on the lines of a A-1/A-11 Ghibli. A closer example is how the Finns use their Hawks: gunpods, Russian "R-60 (AA-8)" AAMs, and Vinten optical-infrared camera pods. Or how UAE used their Hawks: Vinten camera-pods, and Matra Magics AAMs. The Kuwaitis used AIM-9L Sidewinders.
My question is can an armed Hawk do the job in the Indian scenario? Surely, they can't take off with any meaningful payloads from the J&K/Ladakh regions. Along the eastern borders, it may be more useful, but I am not totally convinced.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Cross post.
Tender for CFD analysis of icing characteristics of turbofoan engine's struts & bullet nose including the effect of air intake is out. Shows the inlet design of IUSAV/Aura/Ghatak.
Turbo-fan engine inlet
Layout of the intake
Engine intake model
Tender for CFD analysis of icing characteristics of turbofoan engine's struts & bullet nose including the effect of air intake is out. Shows the inlet design of IUSAV/Aura/Ghatak.
Turbo-fan engine inlet
Layout of the intake
Engine intake model
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Indranil in a modern battlefield the Hawk will be dead meat IMHO. Here the IAF was cribbing about accepting a 1.6M fighter because it didnt have SPJ and now we are speaking of a 0.8M fighter trainer with the same number of pylons being ok in a modern battlefield. Granted it will have significantly more endurance but by being so limited it ties up other assets as escorts which is the exavt opposite of IAFs stated aim to focus on multiroles. IMHO have HAL or pvt industry make another 100 LCAs using the NLCA Mk2 as a bridge to the MCA. Focus should be on endurance, payload and increased envelope 9G etc. Rather than infucting more suboptimal choices because HAL wishes to engage in yet another showoff as the IJT event was vis a vis the LCA.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
About operating costs, if we light fighter the Hawk with radar etc, the only key costs would be in terms of the engine LRUs and some of the more advanced Tejas ones.. will that translate to 100% more for the Tejas? Doubt it..
IMO the time of the slow flying fighter is not there for our opponents - for India there is no Iraq to push around.. go for better ISR, persistent and more modern munitions with Tejas.
IMO the time of the slow flying fighter is not there for our opponents - for India there is no Iraq to push around.. go for better ISR, persistent and more modern munitions with Tejas.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Akbar with EW kit
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Agree.Viv S wrote:The Combat Hawk is a solid idea as long as they limit the project to just to an upgrade of the IAF's birds. It'll allow the Hawk squadrons (esp. the core of instructor pilots) to contribute in at least some manner in wartime.
...
HAL's attempt on Combat Hawk should be limited to integrating more weapons to in-service Hawk AJTs (and to additional Hawks that will be added to training squadrons). There is probably a huge market (i.e. existing Hawk users) for that sort of incremental capability upgrade. Combat Hawk (i.e. capability upgrade of existing Hawks) should be seen as more of secondary reserves in the event of all-out war. Useful to have those extra 150+ units to cover gaps for rearguard duties and occasional front-line action.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
About Hawks in combat:
At any given time the IAF has among its ranks a number of pilots who have graduated on Pilatus and are moving on to Hawks. Another bunch may be qualified for weapon firing on Hawks but not night flying. Another bunch may be fully qualified and waiting to be posted for conversion to other a/c like Jaguar. Yet another bunch will have received their posting but will not yet be qualified to fly the Jag/Su-30 solo although they are fully qualified on the Hawk. This bunch of pilots may constitute (I am guessing here) about 5-10% of the strength of pilots qualified to fly and fire weapons in the IAF. In case of war, these pilots will not be asked to sit and twiddle their thumbs as all available instructors and aircraft are off fighting a war. These qualified Hawk pilots will be sent into action in Hawks. They will be led by a senior pilot on missions which will conform to the level of training they have acquired on the Hawk
In any given CAS/ground attack scenario the two extremes are
a. Intense ground fire, SAMs, Manpads,interceptors waiting to kill our a/c
b. Absolutely no opposition at all
Assuming that "a" is always the case is being over cautious and some missions that could have taken place will not take place because of that
Assuming the "b" is always the case is foolhardiness and there may be unnecessary losses unless pilots get lucky
Typically, in the absence of intelligence or prior knowledge of what sort of opposition to expect, probing missions will be led by senior pilots. Of course there is risk, but these people are soldiers.
We must not dismiss the force multiplier effect of a UAV/AWACS combination over a battle zone. Assuming top cover is provided (or is not required for other reasons -like local air dominance already achieved) then the UAV will monitor the SAM sites and the men armed with Manpads and feed to the AWACS which will feed coordinates to some aircraft that will be able to hit these targets at standoff ranges. A combat Hawk could well find application in this sort of scenario
Here's a suggestion from me: Do not mean to be patronizing but I am serious. Pay attention to the Iron Fist demos. They show what the IAF will do in war. Including Hawk and An 32 bombing missions.
At any given time the IAF has among its ranks a number of pilots who have graduated on Pilatus and are moving on to Hawks. Another bunch may be qualified for weapon firing on Hawks but not night flying. Another bunch may be fully qualified and waiting to be posted for conversion to other a/c like Jaguar. Yet another bunch will have received their posting but will not yet be qualified to fly the Jag/Su-30 solo although they are fully qualified on the Hawk. This bunch of pilots may constitute (I am guessing here) about 5-10% of the strength of pilots qualified to fly and fire weapons in the IAF. In case of war, these pilots will not be asked to sit and twiddle their thumbs as all available instructors and aircraft are off fighting a war. These qualified Hawk pilots will be sent into action in Hawks. They will be led by a senior pilot on missions which will conform to the level of training they have acquired on the Hawk
In any given CAS/ground attack scenario the two extremes are
a. Intense ground fire, SAMs, Manpads,interceptors waiting to kill our a/c
b. Absolutely no opposition at all
Assuming that "a" is always the case is being over cautious and some missions that could have taken place will not take place because of that
Assuming the "b" is always the case is foolhardiness and there may be unnecessary losses unless pilots get lucky
Typically, in the absence of intelligence or prior knowledge of what sort of opposition to expect, probing missions will be led by senior pilots. Of course there is risk, but these people are soldiers.
We must not dismiss the force multiplier effect of a UAV/AWACS combination over a battle zone. Assuming top cover is provided (or is not required for other reasons -like local air dominance already achieved) then the UAV will monitor the SAM sites and the men armed with Manpads and feed to the AWACS which will feed coordinates to some aircraft that will be able to hit these targets at standoff ranges. A combat Hawk could well find application in this sort of scenario
Here's a suggestion from me: Do not mean to be patronizing but I am serious. Pay attention to the Iron Fist demos. They show what the IAF will do in war. Including Hawk and An 32 bombing missions.