Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Rahul M » 19 Feb 2014 14:19

plz do a google search on his name.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 21 Feb 2014 03:10

Russian Defense Ministry Unveils $9B UAV Program
Feb. 19, 2014 - 04:48PM |
By JAROSLAW ADAMOWSK


WARSAW — Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has announced a program to spend about 320 billion rubles (US $9 billion) by 2020 on military UAVs, according to local news agency ITAR-TASS.

Under the plan, the new drones will boost the reconnaissance, communications and combat capacities of the Russian armed forces, according to the minister. Shoigu did not disclose the number of UAVs to be acquired. Presently, the Russian military operates a fleet of nearly 500 drones, the minister said.

The latest move follows last year’s announcement by Russian President Vladimir Putin that UAVs are a vital area of development in modern aviation, and that Russia needs to develop a wide range of drones, including combat and reconnaissance variants.

The Russian military is set to test the Yabhon United 40 medium-altitude, long-endurance UAV built by the United Arab Emirates’ Adcom Systems.

Other foreign-based companies to supply drones to Russia include Israel Aerospace Industries, which delivered 12 UAVs to the military under a deal inked in 2009. ■

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 21 Feb 2014 08:00

Sorry,the last post found the wrong td.! Here's Karnad of "firing up" Indian defence industry.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinion ... wa_JqLNmN8

Fire Up Defence Industry

By Bharat Karnad
Published: 21st February 2014

The recent Singapore Air Show opened a week after the Indian Defence Expo (Defexpo 2014) ended in Delhi. What evoked interest in Singapore was the CN-235 turboprop maritime patrol aircraft that Indonesia displayed there. Considering the Indonesian defence industry was revived only in 1976 with the establishment of Indonesian Aerospace (IA), this is quite an accomplishment. With IA contemplating manufacture of the South Korean T-50i light fighter, Indonesia may soon have a cheap supersonic combat aircraft to sell to developing states hard up for cash.

Put this development in perspective. The prototype of the indigenous multi-role Marut HF-24 supersonic combat aircraft, the first ever produced outside the United States and Europe, took to the skies over Bangalore in 1961. That project should have led to the emergence of a comprehensively-capable Indian defence industry supplying the Indian military and the rest of the Third World, and as generator of high-technologies to drive the economy. Instead, between a foreign aircraft-fixated Indian Air Force and short-sighted Indian politicians (to wit, defence minister Krishna Menon who decided against sanctioning `5 crore for rejigging the Orpheus-12R engine with reheat the British firm Bristol-Siddeley had produced as power plant for a NATO fighter to fit the HF-24) the Marut was eliminated on the excuse of being “under-powered”. It aborted growth of the defence industry in general, habituated the Defence Public Sector Units (DPSUs) to an endless cycle of licensed manufacture, and turned the country into an arms dependency that can be jerked around at will by foreign suppliers.

Understandably, at the DefExpo the mood was morose in the stalls of the private sector majors, among them L&T, Tata, Pipapav, and Bharat Forge, as well as smaller private firms, all venturing into the high-value military market. The private sector defence industry has, time and again, proved itself in the most prestigious and sensitive indigenous high-technology projects, such as Agni missiles and Arihant-class ballistic missile firing nuclear-powered submarine. They have shown particular appetite for ingesting and innovating transferred technology and for complex designing and production engineering. It is talent the DPSUs seem bereft of in the main because profit-linked survivability is not their concern, even less motive. No matter how incompetent and wasteful, they keep getting showered with mega contracts by the Indian government, forcing the more productive, technologically capable, and cost-efficient private sector firms to make to do with meagre sub-contracts.

The representatives at the Indian DPSU stalls at the DefExpo were, however, all jaunt and puffed-up chests, because continued government patronage has resulted in over-full order-books they are in no position to deliver on. After some 60-odd years one thing is clear: DPSUs simply cannot absorb military technology, leave alone develop new products, and are content with their limited skill-sets of reproducing military hardware by screwing plate A onto plate B as per detailed design instruction sheets provided them. This is the stuff of Meccano sets, which in a bygone era helped young kids put together toy cranes and trucks—the very essence of licensed manufacture. The DPSUs have even ignored the transferred technology available in massive documentation with the ordnance factories (OFs) which, as in the case of the 155mm Bofors howitzer field gun, was collecting dust for 30 years.

Take the case of the follow-on to the Bofors gun. As the preferred option of buying a foreign 155mm/52 calibre towed artillery gun system was not materialising the army is considering a desi alternative. The OFs working with the transferred Bofors technologies have struggled to produce a gun which, alas, has featured many failures, including repeated barrel bursts in test firings, showing up the DPSU capability deficiencies. In the meantime, Bharat Forge bought technology from Elbit, an Israeli Company, fully digested it, introduced its own innovations into the design, and now has a ready artillery piece which it is willing to enter into competition against rival systems produced anywhere, including by the OFs and L&T. L&T, contrarily, decided against full transfer of technology from the French Company, Nester, on the ground that buying expensive foreign technology without a fair chance of selling it to the army makes no commercial sense. India would have long ago rolled out an advanced successor gun system had the Bofors technology been passed on to the private sector even as the OFs assembled this gun from completely knocked-down kits.

The department of defence production (DDP) in the ministry of defence (MoD) is the chief culprit. The DDP sees its remit as protecting the DPSUs, not as growing a national defence industry, which last requires acknowledging the private sector defence industrial assets as national resource. This means that a howitzer gun will not be purchased from the private sector, no matter how desperate the army’s need for it.

How hurtful to the national interest is the official procurement policy may be gauged from the fact that despite the entire fleet of some 1,000 Russian T-72S tanks being currently immobilised owing to suspect gun barrels that have burst with disturbing regularity, the DDP has not entertained an offer (made directly to defence minister A K Antony in 2013) by a big private company to fit the rifled gun barrels it has produced on two tanks on a “no cost, no commitment” basis for rigorous testing. A year later, the DDP is still dithering, willing to risk an army with defanged strike forces than approve testing of tank gun barrels sourced to this private firm lest successful tests lead to pressures to buy them, thereby setting a precedent.

Then again the entire government and military system tilts against the private sector defence industry. The Defence Procurement Procedure the MoD has laboured over is a joke. It is big on extolling “Make and Buy Indian” but in practice provides it cover for doing nothing, least of all actively encourage and incentivise the private sector companies, or enable fair competition between them and DPSUs that the department of defence production and the MoD know the latter will lose. The problem is too many politicians, bureaucrats, military officers, and DPSU personnel are milking this system to accept its radical overhaul.


The parasitical babus within the MOD from the track record of the last 30 years in particular,have done their utmost to protect the turf of the incompetent DPSUs to the detriment of the nation's defence.A great error was made when the economy was opened up 15 odd ys. ago,in not allowing the pvt. sector an unfettered role in manufacturing defence systems and competing with the DPSUs.That would've shaken up the entire DRDO/DPSUs and we would perhaps have had pvt. sector wares serving in the armed forces today.They were constrained to being mere "bit players",contributing a titbit here,a morsel there.For example,L&T who have mightily contributed to the ATV programme,would've built subs for the IN.Tatas,Mahindras,etc.,would be rolling out armoured vehicles/ICVs,and the IA would have hundreds of arty pieces in stock.

Aviation is a far more difficult science to absorb,but even here-as is now being proposed,the pvt. sector could've started off by manufacturing light transports,light helos,etc.,and perhaps even trainers.Just look at how in Japan and elsewhere the pvt. sector giants like Mitsubishi,etc.,have been in the forefront of the aviation sector.It is still not too late to do so and the best decision that the new dispensation can do for the nation's defence is to allow the pvt. sector total freedom in manufacturing whatever they like and include their wares in competition with the DPSUs.In munitions,small arms,etc.,there is huge scope for the pvt. sector too to produce what the DPSUs are struggling to achieve.

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

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Viv S » 21 Feb 2014 15:38

sattili wrote:
Viv S wrote:And rather than the unlikely scenarios of sanctions or a collapsing Russia, a more pertinent factor is the willingness in Russia to respect the terms of a signed legal contract.

So this is how Boeing honored the terms of a signed legal contract
http://helihub.com/2013/10/14/boeing-charges-us-army-for-new-helicopter-parts-but-uses-old-ones/
Boeing charges US Army for new helicopter parts but uses old ones
14 Oct, 13
"Boeing significantly overstated estimates" of new components needed for CH-47F helicopters and "primarily installed used parts instead" under a $4.4-billion contract awarded in 2008, according to the report, labeled "For Official Use Only" and obtained by Bloomberg News.


Shows the exemplary way of honoring contracts :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


Nowhere does it say that the contract was breached.


The CH-47F contract “was not well-written and actually allowed Boeing to determine whether to install a new or reworked part,” said Serchak, the inspector general’s spokeswoman.

“The used parts were salvaged” from remanufactured helicopters and the company “installed significantly more” of them “instead of the proposed” new items, according to the audit.

The inspector general didn’t recommend that the Army seek refunds on the 2008 contract because the Army “did not look at kinds and quantities” of parts in its technical reviews before the contract was signed “and did not define to Boeing what was acceptable and what was unacceptable,” Serchak said.

“Therefore, because this practice is allowable under the contract, it is doubtful that there is a legal basis to seek a refund because of wrongdoing by Boeing,” she said. “However, Boeing could voluntarily refund these amounts.”



If the contract was drawn up poorly, its hardly surprising that the company would exploit it.

Please do explain how this is the same thing as the Russians simply refusing the ToT for the T-90's armor and barrel, and then (reportedly) transferring some of it only once a new contract for Uralvagonzavod built T-90s had been signed. Or signing a contract to refurbish a ship for $800 million and then presenting a new bill for $3.2 billion while the Russian military made veiled threats about wanting the ship for themselves.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 21 Feb 2014 16:04

Not to mention how the Scorpene deal was poorly negotiated by our priceless MOD babus,and then prices were hiked dramatically ,with even the Spanish co-participants unilaterally calling it a day and vamoosing!
Performance of products by many western and even Israeli firms have failed to make the grade at times.
We've had umpteen incidents in the past of spares sourced from the grey market not the OEM,with even HAL accused by the IAF in the past of substituting genuine Russian parts for MIGs with dubious east European origin spares,exporting the genuine. If one is not careful when negotiating a contract and reading the fine print attached,one "pays the piper".

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 22 Feb 2014 08:07

It looks like good news on the IJT front.FOC expected by Dec 2014.A deadline had earlier been given which seems to have done the trick.AKA recently made a speech about it and AWST Feb 24/14 has more details.According to the HAL boss,the engine issue has been sorted out and BAe helping with spin and stall testing,etc.The IAF have ordered 12 LSP and 73 production aircraft.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby NRao » 22 Feb 2014 08:24

Paid article:

U.S. Defense Trade With India Evolves

In the international race to court export weapons to India, the U.S. lags compared with longtime trading partners Russia and Israel.

The U.S. has made up some ground—the U.S. India Business Council estimates military trade between the two nations has gone from nearly nonexistent to more than $14 billion in the last dozen years. And to build on that success, U.S. companies are eager to pursue tighter partnerships with India, which is shifting its emphasis from weapon imports to deals that can help it develop a domestic manufacturing base.

To read the full article, log in to the Aviation Week Intelligence Network.

Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 364
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Eric Leiderman » 22 Feb 2014 22:27

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 864009.cms

Indians want to be engineers but use slide rules and calculators only, not the tools of trade, where design parameters meet the challenges of maintanence, production ,etc

We need to invest in the trades, plumbers electricians, technicians, maintanence engineers (etc) all these should be at least diploma level education with salaries to match. The stigma attached to handling "panna pakkar" as a career option holds the country back, there is only so much softwear can do, and we may reach a plateau there too.

I am surprised why industry has not stepped upin a big way in financing institutions , where the cirriculum reflects real world skill sets. Where part of the diploma is spent on the shop floor in workshops etc. I know there are tech institutes around , but these have to polifirate,

Once we can get our degreewallas to get their coveralls dirty as a rule of thumb instead of isolated instances , we will be world beaters. It is happening in some industries , eg auto, power electricals etc
but we have a ways to go.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 23 Feb 2014 05:06

Very true.The maintenance and repair aspect is in India across the board a dirty phrase.Just look at the condition of most govt. offices housed in beautiful Raj era mansions.Files placed on seats to cover holes in the cane,filthy walls,chairs with broken arms,etc.,etc.Anything of value has been pilfered.To go one step up just look at Air India's aircraft,barring the new unaffordable Nightmares...sorry,Dreamliners! I once travelled Business class in an AI jet which had torn seat covers,obese ancient hostesses,got stranded on the return because of an ATC strike back home,and to get the airline to find/extend hotel accommodation at their cost,etc., took half a day,not half an hour when compared with other airlines!

I knew a gent of SPore Airlines who rose right from the lowest level of technician to retire as a director.He knew how to repair a toilet on an aircraft himself.Eric is right.Until our boardroom boys get their business suits and dungarees dirty,and change attitude towards blue collar workers,this "caste system" will prevent us from progressing rapidly.We need a host of polytechnics to train technicians in all disciplines and industries.They are the ones who keep the wheels running smoothly and are always in short supply.In the aviation industry,even more so.Time is money.The latest DGCA grounding of a US airliner a case in point.I know of one innovative institution,decades old,which has excellent courses for technicians and awards diplomas,employs these technicians and does make some components for the DRDO's projects.But this is a lone example.Instead of wasting money and time in setting up new colleges and universities ,whose degree holders when they come out are unemployable,it would be far better to open more polytechnics where diploma holders get immediate employment and paid good salaries.In fact many in the IT industry perhaps could be described as being "mental technicians".

symontk
BRFite
Posts: 920
Joined: 01 Nov 2001 12:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby symontk » 24 Feb 2014 20:20

spotted one IL-38 while in Trivandrum on Sunday evening, must have come there for Dakshin Prahaar

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 25 Feb 2014 21:33

IJT? Speaking too soon? Despite the last media announcement,signifying a sudden turnaround of the IJT programme,which HAL hopes will attain IOC before the year end,another reports indicate otherwise,saying that there may have to be limited imports if the IJT does not make the grade.The same report says that he Swiss/Pilatus have visited the Sulur BRD base near Coimbatore to assess the production capability of the Pilatus PC-7 at the base.The IAF have been pressing for some time using their BRD capabilities to produce aircraft and components.HAL meanwhile is determined to go ahead with its HTT-40 BT while the IAF continues to reject it.Surely the MOD should step in to stem the rot/spat and waste of scarce resources?

gnair
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Aug 2008 03:15

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby gnair » 25 Feb 2014 23:14

Philip wrote:IJT? Speaking too soon? Despite the last media announcement,signifying a sudden turnaround of the IJT programme,which HAL hopes will attain IOC before the year end,another reports indicate otherwise,saying that there may have to be limited imports if the IJT does not make the grade.


A small minority within HAL management have a hell-bent mindset of trying to settle and put right, a perceived or actual 'breach of trust' from the HPT-32 airworthiness issues that took IAF lives multiple times.

And on the IAF side, it's been a 'never again' attitude. They have reason to feel that way because accidents at the basic trainer level have deep psychological ramifications for the whole intake/batch of kids, especially if the equipment were faulty and uncorrectable within the shortest possible time. More so, if it's wiped out cream of the crop flight instructors along with the cadets.

But that aside, the HAL of today is a vastly improved organization with structured management training programs and built-in accountability standards as opposed to what it was a decade ago.

Even if its not a trainer perse, there is still a requirement for an armed single engine turbo-prop (wishfully PT-6 powered) that can fly low and slow and do COIN work and border patrols and intercept UAV's apart from being a scout, directing artillery fire. The BSF and the Coast Guard must have such a platform, that can take care of business within the 100 Nautical mile from periphery range.

If and when such a platform earns it's respect in actual operational conditions exceeding 100,000 hours, the IAF's of the world will come knocking on HAL's door. The onus is on HAL to prove it, with their own financial and material resources, rather than sending yearly dividends to Delhi (jackasses...instead of spending more on R&D or re-tooling or manpower enhancement) and the targeted customer should be a non-IAF entity like the ICG or BSF, but the project initiative should not be blocked at this juncture.

With the PC-7's, as good as an aircraft it is, if an ITAR certificate was signed during the initital procurement, there would be no way to be able to arm this thing and use it as an assault platform even if there was a need to do so in future. The OEM will stop all support even if a juggad was done on it, and that should be a concern to all decision makers.

Fast jets have limited value and high operational and financial risk in doing the 5,000<ft./ 200kts</100NM</2,000ft< dirt strip landing distance, asymetrical warfare segment and this is exactly where the HAL product should fit in, rather than being a direct competitor to the PC-7.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19839
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 26 Feb 2014 01:22

Air force purchase of 250 Standoff autonomous air to surface weapon SPICE approved by the MoD.

https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/437925488506703872

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby ramana » 26 Feb 2014 02:32

KaranM, What is this SPICE? Is it an ASM and if so how does it differ from other Israeli maal?

Sorry.

Wiki tells its GPS and El Optical guidance kit for dumb bombs based on derivative of Popeye.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spice_(guidance_kit)


...
Since it has a total of 12 control surfaces in 3 groups (fore, mid-body and tail), the "Spice" has a very long glide range, of about 60 kilometers. This allows a striking aircraft to release a bomb at a target without entering the threat envelope of most short- and medium-range air defense systems which might protect it. This is achieved while saving the higher costs associated with propelled munitions.

......
...On the ground, an unguided bomb is fitted with a "Spice" guidance kit.

Still on the ground, each bomb's memory may be loaded with up to 100 different targets, complete with their image (usually acquired by imagery intelligence) and geographical coordinates.

The bomb is then loaded on a strike aircraft. In the pylon to which the bomb is attached there is a datalink between the aircraft's cockpit and the bomb.

As the aircraft flies in the air and approaches a target, either the Weapon Systems Officer (WSO – the backseater in such aircraft as the F-15E Strike Eagle or F-16I Sufa) or pilot (in single-seat aircraft) can use the TV\IIR display in the cockpit to see the image the bomb sends to him. Once he selected one of the preprogrammed targets, or fed the bomb with a target himself (by feeding it with either an image or geographical coordinates to home on), the bomb is ready for release into a guided trajectory.

Once the bomb is released, it begins searching its target in order to acquire it and home on it. This can be done in several ways:

First, there is pure CCD or IIR (for low lighting conditions) image matching, when the guidance section uses algorithms in order to match the target image in its memory with the image provided by the seeker, and align the center of the seeker's FOV with the desired image.

Second, if the CCD\IIR seeker can not acquire its target for any reason (such as visual obstructions), the bomb can automatically switch to GPS\INS guidance. This means that the bomb aspires to bring itself to the target's altitude at a known geographical location. The bomb receives data on its current location from GPS satellites, or from an inertial navigation system in the bomb itself, that has been fed, through the pylon datalink, with the dropping aircraft's coordinates a fraction of a second before drop, and can therefore calculate its own coordinates from the dropping time and on.

Third, there is a manual "man-in-the-loop" guidance option, in which the WSO looks at a backseat TV display in order to see the seeker's view (sent to him through a RF datalink) and uses the backseat stick to control the bomb all the way to the target. With a skilled WSO that has a "sensitive hand", this guidance method is probably the most accurate one employed today for air-dropped munitions, and has no measurable miss distance. Its main drawback is that it allows for only one bomb to be guided at a time.

...


So no hope for DRDO Sudarshan and other programs?

Anyway good news for it means all those Corps commanders will be taken out in their tents.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19839
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 26 Feb 2014 03:23

Ramana ji, this is akin to the Israeli AASM, although unpowered. Basically an intelligent glide bomb.

I presume once local alternatives exist, they will be acquired in bulk. IAF wants thousands of all these types.
DRDO (RCI) has a program for something similar apart from Sudarshan variants.

Right now IAF is building a "core" of new gen PGMs off the shelf - Brahmos-A, Griffin NGLGB, now this Spice.. for still having a good punch even as mass production of more cost effective local types goes through the usual trials process.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 26 Feb 2014 07:23

these "low 100s" purchases mean very little as only highest value targets can receive one cycle of attacks even if all were decided to be expended.

anything short of the "10s of thousands" with the USA is just high value target and not a paradigm shift into PGM mode. this can only happen with great funding into domestic projects like sudarshan and its successors.

for attacking 25 points at a camp or airbase in parallel, something like glonass guided desi SDB sounds ideal. four a/c could release them all together from 40km away and let them self guide.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby srai » 26 Feb 2014 07:46

^^^

Going by the IAF's PGM purchase trends, the IAF prefers to purchase 30/50 to 100 units for initial trial period. After that (if it fits force's need) the IAF orders in batches of 100 to 500 units of a type.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby srai » 26 Feb 2014 07:55

ramana wrote:KaranM, What is this SPICE? Is it an ASM and if so how does it differ from other Israeli maal?

Sorry.

Wiki tells its GPS and El Optical guidance kit for dumb bombs based on derivative of Popeye.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spice_(guidance_kit)


...
Since it has a total of 12 control surfaces in 3 groups (fore, mid-body and tail), the "Spice" has a very long glide range, of about 60 kilometers. This allows a striking aircraft to release a bomb at a target without entering the threat envelope of most short- and medium-range air defense systems which might protect it. This is achieved while saving the higher costs associated with propelled munitions.

......
...On the ground, an unguided bomb is fitted with a "Spice" guidance kit.

Still on the ground, each bomb's memory may be loaded with up to 100 different targets, complete with their image (usually acquired by imagery intelligence) and geographical coordinates.

The bomb is then loaded on a strike aircraft. In the pylon to which the bomb is attached there is a datalink between the aircraft's cockpit and the bomb.

As the aircraft flies in the air and approaches a target, either the Weapon Systems Officer (WSO – the backseater in such aircraft as the F-15E Strike Eagle or F-16I Sufa) or pilot (in single-seat aircraft) can use the TV\IIR display in the cockpit to see the image the bomb sends to him. Once he selected one of the preprogrammed targets, or fed the bomb with a target himself (by feeding it with either an image or geographical coordinates to home on), the bomb is ready for release into a guided trajectory.

Once the bomb is released, it begins searching its target in order to acquire it and home on it. This can be done in several ways:

First, there is pure CCD or IIR (for low lighting conditions) image matching, when the guidance section uses algorithms in order to match the target image in its memory with the image provided by the seeker, and align the center of the seeker's FOV with the desired image.

Second, if the CCD\IIR seeker can not acquire its target for any reason (such as visual obstructions), the bomb can automatically switch to GPS\INS guidance. This means that the bomb aspires to bring itself to the target's altitude at a known geographical location. The bomb receives data on its current location from GPS satellites, or from an inertial navigation system in the bomb itself, that has been fed, through the pylon datalink, with the dropping aircraft's coordinates a fraction of a second before drop, and can therefore calculate its own coordinates from the dropping time and on.

Third, there is a manual "man-in-the-loop" guidance option, in which the WSO looks at a backseat TV display in order to see the seeker's view (sent to him through a RF datalink) and uses the backseat stick to control the bomb all the way to the target. With a skilled WSO that has a "sensitive hand", this guidance method is probably the most accurate one employed today for air-dropped munitions, and has no measurable miss distance. Its main drawback is that it allows for only one bomb to be guided at a time.

...


So no hope for DRDO Sudarshan and other programs?

Anyway good news for it means all those Corps commanders will be taken out in their tents.


Going by the description of SPICE and its 100 preprogrammed targets, the IAF would be using it more for "known" high priority targets of static/semi-static ones. The IAF should have very detailed data on these targets, and it would make sense they use the SPICE preprogrammed target feature to keep these ready from day 1. With 250 SPICE kits ordered, it would mean two PGMs per 100 targets (or up to 200 targets if success rate is 100%) with balance 50 for training and other targets of opportunity.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 26 Feb 2014 09:06

no harm in these, but not game changers or relevant to a long 2 month high intensity war.

I await the cheap 1L cost desi SDB (glonass and wings for long range), sudarshan LGB and DA-SDB(direct attack) using IIR/MMW for sensors to attack moving small targets like tanks and IFVs in tactical role.

the real revolution by Khan has not been adding a few more fatty bulges to the F-15/F-16/F-18, not even in engines because their 80s engines were also pretty good, not in stealth because most adversaries cannot detect or track normal ac reliably all the time, not in avionics or paint jobs, but in SAR/GMTI for long range ground target tracking and "democratization" of the PGM thing from high-100s (IIT AIR 500 onlee) to *lakhs* (all 12th pass can apply). likewise even a old model F-solah with APG66 + amraam punches way above its weight due to amraam...and good loiter time of the Solah.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19839
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 26 Feb 2014 13:06

Indian Defense Sentinel..

AEW&CS Project Poised for Successful Completion, AWACS(I) Next

According to a recent written reply in parliament by the Defense Minister, the AEW&CS is on schedule for completion by March 2014.

During DefExpo 2014, a CABS official gave IDP Sentinel pretty much the same message.

The projected which was initially expected to be completed by October 2011 is in its final stages and will be completed by March 2014.


The first EMB-145I to be delivered to India under the contract ceremonially rolled out in Brazil on February 21, 2011.

Embraer has so far delivered 2 EMB-145I aircraft. The third and the last aircraft would be delivered in December 2014.

The two delivered aircraft are fully configured for their role and undergoing acceptance tests by an IAF technical evaluation team. There are no serious issues. The software is being tweaked based on IAF inputs.

After delivering the three EMB-145I AEW&CS, CABS will focus on the AWACS(I) project which will feature a 3 antenna AESA radar housed in a non rotating rotodome, like the one mounted on the IAF's AWACS supplied by Israel, for full 360-deg coverage at all time. The side mounted twin antennas on the current AEW&CS provide 120-deg coverage on either side.

The platform for AWAC(I) is yet to be finalized.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 26 Feb 2014 13:28

the ereyie claims to have 150' coverage, but 120' will do fine for a start - we are starting from 0' . creditable effort is they can IOC this next month. the radars can get upgrades or sw changes as time goes on. more than azimuth raw values its the elevation and depression angle of the radar that sounds useful in this role...ability to track higher flying objects and also low level sneakers using high angle lookdown scans.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby merlin » 26 Feb 2014 14:38

Ok so it looks like now we have a name to refer to it - AWACS(I). I always thought it was a four sided square array rather than a triangular one. Platform should now be decided ASAP, maybe A330 to get a common platform for the future refuellers and AWACS. Later we can move to A-G with SAR GMTI payload on same platform. All if Airbus plays ball.

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2033
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby srin » 26 Feb 2014 15:50

Honestly, I can't make sense out of the AWACS/AEW procurement.

We went to great lengths to have IL-78s modified for the Phalcon system, and we stopped at three.
We got ERJ-145 modified and seems we will again stop at three.
And now, we want to have another platform modified for the DRDO AWACS.

Each time we go for modifications, it has resulted in delays and also increases the number of entities involved, increases cost. Can we just decide on a platform and stick to it ?

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

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Austin » 26 Feb 2014 16:14

Agreed they should have based the DRDO AWACS on either B737 or A320 platform that way we could have standardised on them and also have given more potential for growth and reach.

Most likely for budget reasons they would have stuck with ERJ and the desire to prove first on smaller scale before moving to bigger one.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby merlin » 26 Feb 2014 17:07

I don't think IAF would have put the cash for an AWACS(I) unless proved on the EMB first. And Il-76 and derivatives based platform is sub-optimal so they stopped at 3 (plus negotiating for 2 more).

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 26 Feb 2014 18:26

the addl phalcons on Il76 will not happen.
because IL76-new version is another airframe that is just entering production.
unless you want a old airframe from Rus stock (they have around 70 in various boneyards iirc)

it has to be a play where we select a big platform (say 737-800 or A330)
- mount the phalcon radar on it with mission systems (2 units)
- mount the indic radar and mission systems later (N units)

meantime the ERJ145 has to go on, as the 2nd line system and gap fillers...I dont think we can fund more than 10 of the biggies. but we need another 20 gap fillers.

the 737 might already have the simulations and structure mods in place for the Wedgetail pgm, might be easier route.

gnair
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Aug 2008 03:15

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby gnair » 26 Feb 2014 19:37

Do consider from an operational point of view, the EMB-145 just requires an airfield of about 4,500ft on a (29.92)std. pressure day, to refuel and get going from one mission to another in the tactical battle space. And these are pretty rugged aircraft to deal with, with minimal ground support. As of now, Embraer has a good reputation for efficient(peace time) OEM support. The only other close alternatives would have been the Gulfstream-4/5 or the Bombardier Global Express, that are more expensive for initial acquisition costs. So DRDO did make the right choice, but they need about 9 of these to cover 3 sides of the sub-continent.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 26 Feb 2014 20:11

yes stopping at just 3 would be a total waste given the new platform would take years to be structurally ready by the vendor. maybe a combo of 16 MRTT (4 mini squadrons of 4 each) + 5 AWACS on A330 is the way forward.

8 heavy AWACS and (3+10=13 light awacs)/

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19839
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 26 Feb 2014 21:45

i think IAF should order some 3 more of the small desi awacs at least before moving to awacs india

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby merlin » 27 Feb 2014 10:53

Karan M wrote:i think IAF should order some 3 more of the small desi awacs at least before moving to awacs india


Which means they have to order the EMBs NOW. Fat chance of that happening with our slow as molasses procurement cycles.

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby arijitkm » 28 Feb 2014 14:17

India Looking Abroad For Intermediate Jet Trainers. Aviation Week

Saddled with obsolete training aircraft, the Indian air force (IAF) has decided to snub the long-delayed, indigenous HJT-36 Sitara intermediate jet trainer (IJT) and purchase new trainers from abroad.

The IAF has issued a request for information for a lightweight, single-engine, twin-seat trainer with a secondary light attack capability, an official at India’s ministry of defense says.

“We have asked the vendors to provide cost details for the direct purchase of IJTs for batch sizes of 10, 20, 30 and 50 aircraft,” he says.

The RFI comes weeks after Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony said the much-delayed Sitara IJT is likely to be operational this year. “All efforts are being made by the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. [HAL] for achieving the final operational clearance by December 2014,” Antony had said.
.......
.......

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Singha » 28 Feb 2014 15:15

IAF should probably change its name to Imported Air Force at this rate if this be true.
everything from piston engine stage1 trainer to C17 imported with 20 Tejas in the middle to wave the tricolour!

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

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby shiv » 28 Feb 2014 15:38

arijitkm wrote:India Looking Abroad For Intermediate Jet Trainers. Aviation Week

Saddled with obsolete training aircraft, the Indian air force (IAF) has decided to snub the long-delayed, indigenous HJT-36 Sitara intermediate jet trainer (IJT) and purchase new trainers from abroad.

The IAF has issued a request for information for a lightweight, single-engine, twin-seat trainer with a secondary light attack capability, an official at India’s ministry of defense says.

“We have asked the vendors to provide cost details for the direct purchase of IJTs for batch sizes of 10, 20, 30 and 50 aircraft,” he says.

The RFI comes weeks after Indian Defense Minister A.K. Antony said the much-delayed Sitara IJT is likely to be operational this year. “All efforts are being made by the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. [HAL] for achieving the final operational clearance by December 2014,” Antony had said.
.......
.......


LOL. I think this is a "paid for" news item. A Presstitute's viewpoint in other wrods.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21050
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Philip » 01 Mar 2014 12:38

The perfect bird for our Himalayan support operatiosn,the new British "Airlander" hybrid airship!
Affectionately known as the "Flying Bum"!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/is ... 61099.html

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's the world's largest hybrid aircraft

The HAV304 or 'Airlander' is 300ft (91m) long, 113ft (34m) wide and 85ft (26m) high
Paul Gallagher Author Biography

Friday 28 February 2014

The largest aircraft ever seen was launched today, as its British creators promised they could deliver up to 1,000 more and transform how the world responds to international disasters.

Sitting in the only "shed" in the country big enough to accommodate it – one of the two Cardington Hangers that dominate the Bedfordshire landscape – the 302ft (92m) Airlander is part plane, airship and helicopter. It can stay in the air for up to three weeks unmanned and is capable of touching down on land or sea.

Cranfield-based Hybrid Air Vehicles showed off their creation they said could also set a new benchmark for greener aircraft. Iron Maiden lead singer Bruce Dickinson, who is also a professional airline pilot and co-funded the Airlander, compared the £30m aircraft to Thunderbird 2 and declared it a momentous day in aviation history.

He said: “This is a beautiful thing – the sheer imagination and scale of it – British-designed and built. Rarely do you get the chance to be involved in something really at the cutting edge of aviation. We have created the world’s largest aircraft from a shed in Bedford. It is something to be incredibly proud of.”

The US Army was initially going to be the owners of the first HAV Airlander, to use primarily for surveillance missions in Afghanistan. But defence budget cuts meant the project was cancelled and HAV stepped in to bring the Airlander home and bring it to life.

The Airlander is about 60ft longer than the biggest airliners, the Airbus A380 and Boeing 747-8. It is also almost 30ft longer than the cargo-carrying Antonov An-225, which until now was the longest aircraft ever built.

Although resembling an airship with its giant helium-filled balloon on top of a 150ft long flight deck, the Airlander’s unique aerodynamic shape means it can generate lift like an aeroplane wing – and it’s going to get bigger. The prototype on display in Cardington is the forerunner of the Airlander 50, a 50-tonne heavy lift hybrid vehicle that should be in the air this time next year.

Dave Burns, the Airlander’s chief test pilot, gave The Independent a guided tour of the machine which from the rear looks like three giant cigars stitched together. “One of the problems with airships in the past has always been the ground handling with the number of people you need to manhandle it to keep it steady – the Airlander is the solution to that problem with its air cushioned landing system.

“The sheer mass of it makes it different to an airship, which are usually seven to eight tonnes. The Airlander is a 38-tonne machine so the inertia is incredible. Airships are like piloting an aircraft carrier in rough seas but this is very steady. It’s a majestic machine.”

HAV’s chief executive Stephen McGlennan said the plans to build up to 1,000 Airlanders in the coming decades could bring around 1,800 jobs to the area. The company has already had interest from governments and agencies all around the world.

“We want to building one Airlander a month in a few years’ time,” said Mr McGlennan. “Once they're built, they will get to work in places like Canada where they will be pivotal in operating remote mines for example or in the Middle East because of the large deserts they can operate in and master oil and gas pipelines.”

The Airlander project has just received a £2.5 million Government grant to fund research into energy efficient and quieter planes. Business Secretary Vince Cable said HAV is “a British SME that has the potential to lead the world in its field”.

Mr Dickinson said a chance meeting at a fundraiser for a movie project he was working on at the time with HAV’s founder Roger Munk, who died suddenly at the age of 62 in 2010, led him to become a key part of the project and put up the investment needed.

“I came here to a shed in about 2005 to see Roger and talk about the hybrid project,” said Mr Dickinson. “I had no idea I was ever going to see my money again but everyone has busted a gut and it’s brilliant to show it off to people today. In about five years’ time we could have a sustainable form of aviation – much cleaner and greener. You never know, someone like Amazon could be using one of these in the future as a one-stop shop in its supply chain.”


PS: It reminds me of "Leviathan",the gigantic balloon sculpture by world acclaimed Indian artists Anish Kapoor shown at the Grand Palais hall in Paris in 2011 which I was most fortunate to see.

https://www.google.co.in/search?q=levia ... 06&dpr=0.9

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Kersi D » 01 Mar 2014 15:06

Karan M wrote:Air force purchase of 250 Standoff autonomous air to surface weapon SPICE approved by the MoD.

https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/437925488506703872


This is Crystal Maze.

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Kersi D » 01 Mar 2014 15:09

ramana wrote:KaranM, What is this SPICE? Is it an ASM and if so how does it differ from other Israeli maal?

So no hope for DRDO Sudarshan and other programs?

Anyway good news for it means all those Corps commanders will be taken out in their tents.


I think Sudarshan is a laser guided bomb.

K

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby arijitkm » 02 Mar 2014 18:55

Antony orders CBI probe in bribe charges in aircraft engine deal

Defence Minister AK Antony has ordered a CBI probe into allegations that a global engine manufacturing firm had paid bribes to Indian defence officials to bag military contracts from 2007 to 2011 in deals worth over Rs 10,000 crore.


The allegations surfaced in the form of a letter received by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) recently claiming that bribes were paid to officials in HAL and other departments concerned to bag contracts, highly-placed government sources told.

HAL immediately initiated an inquiry into the charges through its Chief Vigilance Officer,?which has found credence in the charges.?The firm in question has supplied engines for the aircraft being manufactured by the HAL for the Indian Air Force, they said.

The investigations by the HAL, CVO have prima facie found that the company allegedly violated several of the contractual obligations with HAL between the period of 2007-11, when these bribes were allegedly paid, they said.

The issue came to light after HAL issued queries to its vendors and suppliers to ensure probity in its transactions as part of its integrity pact to be signed with them, they said.

After the case with the findings and recommendations of the HAL,CVO was brought to the notice of Defence Minister, Antony ordered that the case be handed over to CBI for further investigations, the sources said.

After the development, IAF's several programmes are expected to get delayed but the Defence Ministry is firm that it would not allow any corruption to take place in its procurement process and would take strict action even if it means delays in some of the projects.
.......


As per Headlines Today, Hawk AJT has been crash landed!!!!! :oops:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby ramana » 02 Mar 2014 22:25

He should order a CBI probe on himself for gross dirlection of duty and not following the oath of office he took.

anand_sankar
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 09 Jan 2009 19:24

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby anand_sankar » 02 Mar 2014 22:54

Who needs sanctions when St Anthony the Clean Dhoti is around?

Almost every other manufacturer is going to be blacklisted, and the clean ones cannot compete because they are now 'single vendors'

The next govt needs to make a choice ASAP, does fighting corruption in the short term mean we thoroughly neglect national security priorities.

:x

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19839
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Postby Karan M » 02 Mar 2014 23:08

Kersi D wrote:
Karan M wrote:Air force purchase of 250 Standoff autonomous air to surface weapon SPICE approved by the MoD.

https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/437925488506703872


This is Crystal Maze.


No, Crystal Maze is apparently a derivative of the Popeye called Popeye Lite/Have Lite.
Some 30-40 were purchased for the Mirage 2000s.

The seekers from Popeye are used in the development of the Spice, but former is powered and Spice is unpowered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popeye_(missile)#Variants


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests