Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 11 May 2015 02:27

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 225246.cms

"Agra: Uttar Pradesh Expressways Industrial Development Authority (UPEIDA) is set to build a two-km long special stretch on the upcoming Agra-Lucknow expressway for the landing and takeoff of Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter and cargo planes in case of an emergency."

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 11 May 2015 03:20

^^^ And how many landing strips exist between the said Agra and lucknow route for this to be needed?

aadiverma · Post by **aadiverma** » 11 May 2015 20:47

i tried to read back into the need of the Apache for the Air Force...could not find the necessary discussion...so i ask again for my knowledge....why exactly does the Air force need attack helos? I ask from both strategic and tactical necessity..should these not be pure Army Air corp?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 May 2015 20:58

(a) the Mi35 fleet is nearing retirement and not exactly the best of breed gunships
(b) they need replacement to have something superior to the LCH which the IA air corps have ordered in numbers...some say for h&d reasons.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 11 May 2015 21:27

pragnya wrote:IAF is acting faster on 'privatisation' than the GOI.

they wanted the pvt sector for AVROs, Pilatus manufacture. they are outsourcing overhauls, maintainence now.

what next? outsource BRDs? maintainence commands?

seems they want to be only 'operations' force!!

MiG-29s are now being upgraded by Taneja!

As usual trundling along because every firm associated with upgrade in Russia is acting obdurate for spares and money.

But going on.

And monopoly of HAL has been finally broken.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 11 May 2015 21:30

Shreeman wrote:^^^ And how many landing strips exist between the said Agra and lucknow route for this to be needed?

Many - Look at it as Delhi - Agra - Gwalior - Kanpur - Lucknow - Bareli thing. A few other bases not far out - Allahabad and Gorakhpur.

Heavy transport and fighter flying in this area plus I think it is just a strategic thing. IIRC, I first heard of such a plan in 1998.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 11 May 2015 22:17

Well if you can depot a bit, you can land a fighter or dornier on the main straight of the f1 track outside Delhi! That's long enough for fighters at 1.06km.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 11 May 2015 22:43

deejay wrote:
Shreeman wrote:^^^ And how many landing strips exist between the said Agra and lucknow route for this to be needed?
Many - Look at it as Delhi - Agra - Gwalior - Kanpur - Lucknow - Bareli thing. A few other bases not far out - Allahabad and Gorakhpur.

Heavy transport and fighter flying in this area plus I think it is just a strategic thing. IIRC, I first heard of such a plan in 1998.

Deejay,

Those are major bases/airports.

The number of air strips is simply too many. This is mainly plains, and relatively well travelled area from the british ages. Not just many but too many, as anyone can look see. In the money wasted on grading, strengthening, preparing,stocking and then wasting this runway of a highway for emergencies, you could create minor airports out of *many* of those unused, progressively being encroached upon areas. And that may be actually useful.

This isnt a strategic thing. Its a scam.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 11 May 2015 22:48

^^^ Prasad Saar, moi ordinary pilot, always felt 6000 ' was a small runway. 1.06 kms is runway distance, inclusive of touch down point!!!

We need to install the things they have on carriers for assured stoppage. Or maybe I am getting old and not keeping in touch with the latest.

@ Shreeman ji, agreed. I thought you did not know the bases and tried showing my geographic knawlidge, but now feel stupid . For some reason it has been in the 'ideas' domain for fairly long period. I am sure, after a few / one initial test landing it will never be used again.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 11 May 2015 23:01

Was trying to be glib

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 11 May 2015 23:07

Prasad wrote:Was trying to be glib

My turn now.!!!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 May 2015 06:05

What would happen to BRF if we separated technical discussions from financial ones?

A lot of technical stuff is killed by financial speculation but I would like to start a new type of financial discussion

For example (and this is representative only - not actual figures.)

The total lifetime cost of Hawker Hunters purchased by IAF was 500 crores.
Total cost invested in Su-30 20,000 crores and counting

Total number of aircraft shot down by Hunters in war: 15
Total number of aircraft shot down by Su 30s in war: zero

Hunters are more cost effective than Su 30s

Now lets do a comparison of Gnat and Tejas

etc

Whenever the CAG does a report - it is usually criticized or explained away as the opinion of bean counters and not people who know the technical or operational value of air force assets. But what about BRFites who talk financial figures and do bean counting on here? Does that count as gyan posted by people who are deeply aware of technical and operational issues?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 May 2015 06:08

Let me guess the value of using roads as runways.

IAF experience as per various historic accounts has been that aircraft returning from attack sorties, damaged and short of fuel often had to divert to alternate bases because the base from which the aircraft took off came under attack. In other cases bases were just out of reach. Having a few dozen highway strips to recover aircraft and pilots could knock a few points off attrition in hot war.

srin · Post by **srin** » 12 May 2015 09:13

shiv wrote:What would happen to BRF if we separated technical discussions from financial ones?

A lot of technical stuff is killed by financial speculation but I would like to start a new type of financial discussion

For example (and this is representative only - not actual figures.)

The total lifetime cost of Hawker Hunters purchased by IAF was 500 crores.
Total cost invested in Su-30 20,000 crores and counting

Total number of aircraft shot down by Hunters in war: 15
Total number of aircraft shot down by Su 30s in war: zero

Hunters are more cost effective than Su 30s

Now lets do a comparison of Gnat and Tejas

etc

Whenever the CAG does a report - it is usually criticized or explained away as the opinion of bean counters and not people who know the technical or operational value of air force assets. But what about BRFites who talk financial figures and do bean counting on here? Does that count as gyan posted by people who are deeply aware of technical and operational issues?

Ahh - I started computing the NPV of 500 crores before I saw that it was representational.

That reminds me, when CAG complains about cost overruns, do they account for time value of money or just the absolute value ?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 May 2015 09:56

srin wrote:when CAG complains about cost overruns, do they account for time value of money or just the absolute value ?

when brfites talk about cost do they account for the operational value of a given item or just the absolute value?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 12 May 2015 13:13

Shiv sir, if you were drive today from say Ajmer to Bikaner and there are other strips, you could land a jet there you know. What you need it is around 10000 feet of high quality road almost in a stright line with even keel. There are strips like those in the Golden Quadrilateral. But, the IAF has not tested those and neither has it been specifically called as a diversion for fighters. You may find these strips in almost all parts of the country.

Now, why wouldn't such strips be upgraded in required infrastructure than the new one on the Agra - Lucknow corridor?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 12 May 2015 13:54

shiv wrote:Let me guess the value of using roads as runways.

IAF experience as per various historic accounts has been that aircraft returning from attack sorties, damaged and short of fuel often had to divert to alternate bases because the base from which the aircraft took off came under attack. In other cases bases were just out of reach. Having a few dozen highway strips to recover aircraft and pilots could knock a few points off attrition in hot war.

Shiv,

There is this thing called FOD damage. And you severely underestimate the number of air strips available or those that could be made available if it was so desired.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 May 2015 14:57

Shreeman wrote:
shiv wrote:Let me guess the value of using roads as runways.

IAF experience as per various historic accounts has been that aircraft returning from attack sorties, damaged and short of fuel often had to divert to alternate bases because the base from which the aircraft took off came under attack. In other cases bases were just out of reach. Having a few dozen highway strips to recover aircraft and pilots could knock a few points off attrition in hot war.
Shiv,

There is this thing called FOD damage. And you severely underestimate the number of air strips available or those that could be made available if it was so desired.

The number of airstrips that are known will all be bombed if push comes to shove. That has been the experience of the IAF. No airstrip has been deliberately spared by attackers in the past and in these days of satellite imagery airstrips will not hide. FOD is a possibility on any landing strip, airbase or road, unless kept clear. The whole idea of dedicating a stretch of road for landing is, in general, to serve as a landing strip in wartime emergencies. If you read IAF war stories from veterans - there has been an instance in which a sardar has used his pagdi held at both ends across a strip of runway as a sweeping device to clear small diameter debris off a runway that has post bombing debris to allow takeoffs and landings. I am sure a stretch of road can be kept more clear than a just-bombed runway. This is of particular importance when time is short and a plane short of fuel is looking for a place to land.

That apart - do you have any objection to the idea of using roads as airstrips? I mean - as a corruption and moneymaking device or some such thing?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 12 May 2015 15:20

Shiv,

As far as strategic decisions go, this is a poor one.

You argue that any air strip created will be bombed. This may well be true. Lets us leave it as an unargued fact. But the radar visibility from above and on the ground is hundreds of kilometers. Wont the first craft that lands at such a stretch of road also designate it as an air strip? Then what? With even a forward base, there are air defenses. Will the stretch of road merit some as well? How about a mobile control tower? At what point is this not just letting regular traffic drive on the delhi airport runway as a shortcut?

You underestimated FOD cleanup in Indian conditions. Anecdotal AAP election symbol cleanup aside, the first aircraft encountering something will put paid to the infrastructure. I base this on personal knowledge of how well the roads are likely to be maintained in northern India. So I may may be wrong here too.

My primary objection remains that in the plains, there is absolutely no need nor benefit from such extravagence. Harden the protection of your air strips, make more active if you fear their destruction. These will serve far more in peace time than any contingency infrastructure will do in war time.

If Agra-Lucknow is needing contingency air strips for west or north reasons then the situation is so well past any road runway solution that the detergent better be coming out well before that.

The kookiest of the kooky ideas, the light jet/ijt that shall remain unnamed that was in import news not too long ago, the gripen factory, and this road runway business. The trend of what is sticking to the walls is unhealthy.

edit -- And yes, under the circumstances it also smells of a scam. skyscrapercity has UP expressway development discussions, including posts on this road. They did not generate a lot of confidence in an unbiased reader.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 12 May 2015 17:36

Not to worry the road streach will come pre bombed with craters.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 May 2015 18:28

Shreeman wrote: My primary objection remains that in the plains, there is absolutely no need nor benefit from such extravagence. Harden the protection of your air strips, make more active if you fear their destruction. These will serve far more in peace time than any contingency infrastructure will do in war time.

In fact this is hardly extravagance. It is a cheap solution for recovery of aircraft in a desperate situation. The idea that it is "hardly necessary" is something that I cannot accept from someone outside the Air Force, assuming that you are not part of the IAF. It is the IAF that wants to do this as per the news item linked below.

http://idrw.org/agra-lucknow-expressway ... ts-of-iaf/

I suspect that at least a few people on this board, perhaps you too, are completely unaware of how good some Indian expressways are now. Extra care and maintenance of some bits is hardly likely to be a problem. The IAF is taking responsibility for that.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 12 May 2015 18:54

one of the strange things is the IAF initially did not seem tobe interested in this

Jagan may recall but some of the reasoning was that with some of the support infra needed to assist in these it was not worth it

looks like either new people are thinking differently or some fresh assessment has been done

either way its always good to have an option

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 May 2015 18:58

Shiv,

Totally agree.

In fact, the entire "expressway" system should be blessed by the MOD. It is, after all, a major conduit for military movement - ask the IA that keeps claiming that the Arjun is too heavy for some bridges (how stupid is that).

Expressways are made to military specs. And a small fraction should be made available to recover IAF assets.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 12 May 2015 20:11

We don't have ww2 air strips that we can resurface and use as standby?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 12 May 2015 20:33

shiv wrote:
Shreeman wrote: My primary objection remains that in the plains, there is absolutely no need nor benefit from such extravagence. Harden the protection of your air strips, make more active if you fear their destruction. These will serve far more in peace time than any contingency infrastructure will do in war time.
In fact this is hardly extravagance. It is a cheap solution for recovery of aircraft in a desperate situation. The idea that it is "hardly necessary" is something that I cannot accept from someone outside the Air Force, assuming that you are not part of the IAF. It is the IAF that wants to do this as per the news item linked below.

http://idrw.org/agra-lucknow-expressway ... ts-of-iaf/

I suspect that at least a few people on this board, perhaps you too, are completely unaware of how good some Indian expressways are now. Extra care and maintenance of some bits is hardly likely to be a problem. The IAF is taking responsibility for that.

Shiv,

If the difference is between improving an existing airfield that is not an IAF station right now, vs building these road airports then I will (in my admittedly meaningless opinion) continue to consider thrm extravagence.

Lets us remain disagreed. I fully admit to being outside any military force of any kind, and of the nature and mostly ignorant of quality of current expressways. I am not ignorant of who is building and maintaining thrm, though. Or how weather and public behavior changes them after they are built.

To another poster, there is not even a public register of ex-ww2, heck, post ww2 unused fields. Check Suloor's history if you want.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 12 May 2015 20:38

NRao wrote:Shiv,

Totally agree.

In fact, the entire "expressway" system should be blessed by the MOD. It is, after all, a major conduit for military movement - ask the IA that keeps claiming that the Arjun is too heavy for some bridges (how stupid is that).

Expressways are made to military specs. And a small fraction should be made available to recover IAF assets.

NR,

The great and mighty You Ess Aye cant achieve this. They even have to use rivers for things. The great and mighty You Essar never achieved it. They built off road siberia rolling craft. And what to say of china onlee.

So it is to the nordics we look? Or the Switzerlands? Tiny scaps of lands with handful show pieces that are neutral? Perhaps part of the gripen contract and testing would require this road testing.

And why push for this? Is this the billion dollar priority?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 14 May 2015 04:16

shiv,

an unintended cross-reference: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1841837 courtesy the in house admiral.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 14 May 2015 04:21

Shreeman: Why do I feel the need to remind you that I am the only Admiral around here?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 14 May 2015 04:34

^^^ Not without my mithai, you aren't. Divided among the thousand or so readers that is still about 12 tons I am owed before titles are restored. Hungry people have long memories.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 May 2015 05:15

The great and mighty You Ess Aye (USA) cant achieve this

Not sure achieve what.

The entire Interstate system in the US is owned by the US Dept of Def. The Dept of Trans plans, designed, etc the system, but has to get them approved (rubber stamped now a days) by the DoD.

Granted that the system is not as good a shape as it should be in, but it is designed to military (Army) specs.

In nations that have such a need, just go ahead:

And more on youtube

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 May 2015 05:20

So it is to the nordics we look? Or the Switzerlands?

It is a matter of need.

I am finding out that, for a nation that spends so much and has such a dire need, India seems to be an exception.

On a slightly diff note: I am betting that each nations defines "5th Gen" differently - because of needs - which is reflected in R&D too.

gnair · Post by **gnair** » 14 May 2015 05:21

The Colombian experience with the C- 295. (Avro replacement program).
Great choice for tactical troop transport, Mid air refuelling, Anti sub warfare, AWACS, Andaman & Nicobar operations among others.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Btx-5DEGVvA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4LqzT-b7xE

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 14 May 2015 05:23

NR,

The US interstate system is not an example of what you are trying to support. If you are a civil engineer, and have personal knowledge of roads being used in the US for military craft (civilian cessnas land, crash, topple over just the same all over the world), then go ahead and continue championing the cause.

raj-senthil · Post by **raj-senthil** » 14 May 2015 05:35

Avro aircraft deal: Defence council clears Rs 11,930 cr Tata-Airbus bid

Breaking the deadlock over the long-pending Avro transport aircraft deal for the Indian Air Force, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) on Wednesday cleared the lone bid of Rs 11,930 crore by Tata-Airbus consortium for the joint production of transport aircraft.
The project was stuck due to the single vendor situation despite being cleared last year. While 16 aircraft will be bought in fly-away condition, 40 will be made in India.

The DAC also cleared the acquisition of 145 M-777 howitzer for the Army’s artillery formations. The US had offered these guns through foreign military sales route. The artillery is in dire need of the guns as there has not been a single acquisition post the Bofors scam.

The other projects cleared by the DAC, chaired by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, include 200 Russian Kamov choppers for the IAF and the Army with 100 per cent transfer of technology; and six sets of Brahmos missile systems for the Delhi class destroyers and Talwar class frigates.

It also set up a committee to work out the modalities, like price and offset, for the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France.
The government also decided to take Air India’s two Boeing 777-300 extended range (ER) as a replacement to the ageing Jumbo Jets used as VVIP aircraft for flying the President and the Prime Minister on long overseas tours.

PTI quoted sources as saying that no additional cost would be incurred on procurement of these aircraft. However, the aircraft will undergo a refit to cater to security threats and other aspects.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 May 2015 05:35

"The great and mighty You Ess Aye cant achieve this" came from someone else ........... not me.

So, I provided some facts as to why this has not been achieved (there is no need).

Accept or reject it - up to you.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 May 2015 06:48

Shreeman wrote:

So it is to the nordics we look? Or the Switzerlands? Tiny scaps of lands with handful show pieces that are neutral? Perhaps part of the gripen contract and testing would require this road testing.

Normally, nations have borders that were created by oceans, rivers and mountains. Fences and lines do exist in place.

In the case of IndiaPakistan - north India used to have one natural boundary - the Indus. Once that boundary was crossed, invaders found it pretty easy to invade India.

In Kashmir - fencing is the main "border". In Punjab we have ditch-cum bunds and canals. It was a canal that stopped an Indian advance into Lahore city in 1965. In Rajasthan there is nothing - which is why the Longewala battle was so significant.

Air power will be a decisive factor in pounding any invasions and in India there is a limit to the number of air bases that can be created when only runways are needed for temporary dispersal and emergency recovery. Whatever the number of air bases we create - we can add a dozen recovery airstrips by simply using roadways. If we have X air bases, we can have X+Y recovery runways where Y=road runways specially prepared and maintained for the purpose with once in a while test landings and takeoffs. And its not about just fighters - it could be used for rescue work in emergencies. A runway especially on a pre existing road costs less than an additional airfield and does not require more land to be acquired from a very very populous nation

About the MiG 29. You have probably seen (1980s) videos of the MiG 29 which are prone to FO ingestion. They used to have a mechanically operated door that shut off the intake and opened louvres above the box intakes for take off and landing, with the mechanism being linked to weight on the undercarriage IIRC. The last Concorde crash was because of foreign object ingestion at Paris - so the one anecdote of one FOD incident at Dabolim does not mean much - or it could mean that airfields are as unsafe as roads. What FOD incidents fail to tell us is the statistics of how many successful takeoffs and landings that have been conducted on a particular airstrip before one FOD incident occurred. The fact that the US failed somewhere is not, in my view, a great argument to tell us what to do for our requirements.

I think we have already agreed to disagree on this point because I know and you know that you and I are capable of harping on our respective views on this forever. I only posted this because of the link to the Dabolim incident. No more unless you choose to bring it up again.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 May 2015 08:59

C-295 is a good choice for mini-AWACS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EADS_CASA_ ... 95_AEW.jpg

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 May 2015 09:05

^^ why? we already have proved the Embraer 145 for this. after IAF breaks the bank I doubt they will have cash left even to properly buy and use the pitiful 3 that are on order.

no they want domestic progs to jump to E3++ level in one swoop.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 May 2015 09:51

There are/were supposed to be emergency LGs (locations classified) close to the border (west) to be used in a crisis,and the use of highways in the north shows that we have the PRC in mind.

One reason why Dab has such a poor runway is the huge amt. of tourist traffic flying into Goa,esp. charters that have been using it year in year out.The airlines have had issues over the closed runway hours with the airport authorities who have every year supposedly been repairing the runways,obviously a none-too perfect job done. This is why the IN (and IAF too) where possible,should plan for/build more naval air stations independent of heavy civilian traffic.

V.good news of the decisions taken by the CCS. The Tata-Airbus Avro replacement with the C-295 is great for pvt. industry,a first,and the aircraft as in above posts can be used for multiple mil. roles,ASW/MRP,AEW,etc. In fact it is also ideal for a regional passenger variant and one can easily see the numbers escalating to over 100 for both mil/civ usage.

The decision to also buy/build 200+ Kamov KA-226s should've been done a couple of years ago.IN recent times we've suffered losses of aging Chetaks/Cheetahs which these aircraft will replace.The interesting feature of this helo is the removable cabin modules ,allowing specialized modules like an ambulance pod,etc. fitted.The cabin can also be removed when used as a helo-lifter too. This will be of great help to the IA in support of high-alt ops like those at Siachen. The IAF and IN should also take a look at specialised versions for their usage too as building it in the hundreds at home will bring the price down substantially. We will require upwards of around 400-500 LUHs and part of this large requirement could be filled in by the LUH. great export potential too.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 19 May 2015 09:33

Have they started the test flights of IJT again? I think I saw one just now - it did not look like the Hawk AJT (Not a close look so could be wrong). I saw another one flying about a week or so back.